The Green Bible
October 7th, 2008 by Victor
We’re living in a time where there is much talk about global warming, changing our light bulbs, and offsetting our carbon emission. Even from a Christian perspective we hear on one side of the spectrum we hear “take care of the planet, God gave it to us,” “we have the responsibility to steward the creation, etc.” And on the other side of the spectrum “it’s all going to burn,” “this planet is going to be taken over by God again and fixed so what we do now doesn’t matter, etc”
So the news of this “Green Letter Bible” causes me to think and pose the question, what do you think of all of this? Is this talk of taking care of the planet go too far? Is this Bible idolatrous by making the earth such a focus of Scripture? Or is it good we have a publication like this to turn our attention to God’s creation like we haven’t in the past? So, what do you think?
Here is a description:
From greenletterbible.com - The Green Bible will equip and encourage people to see God’s vision for creation and help them engage in the work of healing and sustaining it. With over 1,000 references to the earth in the Bible, compared to 490 references to heaven and 530 references to love, the Bible carries a powerful message for the earth.
The Green Bible is the definitive movement Bible that shows that God is green and how we can care for and protect God’s creation.
Featuring:
Green-Letter Edition: Verses and passages that speak to God’s care for creation highlighted in green
- Foreword by Archbishop Desmond Tutu
- Essays by Brian McLaren, Cal DeWitt, Barbara Brown Taylor, Pope John Paul II, Ellen Davis, N. T. Wright, Ellen Bernstein, Matthew Sleeth, James Jones, and Gordon Aeschliman
- Inspirational quotes from Christian teachings throughout the ages
- A green Bible topical index
- A personal green Bible trail study guide
- An appendix with information on further reading, how to get involved, and practical steps to take
- Recycled paper, using soy-based ink with a cotton/linen cover
From Amazon.com - The Green Biblewill equip and encourage you to see God’s vision for creation and help you engage in the work of healing and sustaining it. This first Bible of its kind includes inspirational essays from key leaders such as N. T. Wright, Barbara Brown Taylor, Brian McLaren, Matthew Sleeth, Pope John Paul II, and Wendell Berry. As you read the scriptures anew, The Green Bible will help you see that caring for the earth is not only a calling, but a lifestyle.
And for a look inside, click here.
I think the ole, “it’s all gonna burn so who cares about the environment” has up to this point not done well for Christianity’s reputation nor has it been good for God’s creation. It is true that 2 Peter 3 speaks of a fire that will burn the elements with intense heat, but at the same time we don’t know that the end will happen in our lifetime. Every single generation who has thought the end would happen in their lifetime up until now has been wrong! This doesn’t mean that the end will not eventually come, but it does mean that we should not abuse God’s creation. The world we bequeath to our children and grandchildren, etc., should not be a trash heap simply because we didn’t want to bother with caring for God’s creation. It should be the Christians who are out front leading the pro-environment movement…why?…because we are the ones who believe God’s given this earth to us to steward…and ultimately…we’ll be living here forever.
Even so, I think the idea of a Green Bible is ridiculous. Maybe that’s just me.
BTW, isn’t it funny that if you care about the environment in the US you are considered a liberal whereas if you are in the UK you would be considered a conservative?
I think it all depends on your world view, which for many in the environmental movement is implicitly if not explicitly pagan (see http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/15394/ for a really disturbing example).
Is it right, for example, to have $4 / gallon of gas because we don’t want to drill for oil in American at the risk an environmental catastrophe? Economists estimate that if we were to fully utilize our natural energy resources in the US that the price of oil might be $20 / gallon or less. Not to mention our extrication of the middle east mess (we are there to some extent because of oil). We are giving $700 billion per year to countries that are not only anti-American, but also anti-Christian!
Does stewardship (not exploitation) mean that we should take advantage of our natural resources to increase our standard of living? I think that there is a stewardship argument that we should “drill, baby, drill.”
Then again, this assumes a world view on the part of politicians, oil executives, etc, to use the resources appropriately which is another matter.
Hi Tim.
You use the plural pronoun “we” in your talk about worldview. Is it your understanding that “Christianity” is synonimous with America?
Or, who is the “we” you are refering to?
Dustin
Tim,
I’d like to see a source there. First, the oil we drill for would not make an immediate impact, it would take a few years as the refineries are already working at capacity. Second, building new refineries would also take several years. Third, we have 3% of the world’s oil ( Energy Information Administration, “U.S. Crude Oil, Natural Gas and Natural Gas Liquid Resources, 1999 Annual Report,” DOE/EIA-0216 (99) (December 2000). http://www.nrdc.org/air/energy/fensec.asp#note2 ).
We need to get used to the fact that gas will cost $4 a gallon. It’s double (or triple with exchange rates) that in European countries, and we don’t see them digging for oil, do we? We need to spend the next years looking for alternative energy sources and reduce our reliance on oil - not in an effort to lower the price, but so that we even have any left in fifty years.
Sean,
I only think the “Green Bible” is ridiculous if a Christian thinks that is their extent in attempting to live consciously of the environment.
Honestly, I think it’s a distraction from the gospel message.
Yes, be good stewards of all that God gave us. Yes, it all is going to melt in fervent heat. Yes, Drill here Drill now. Yes, do it without ‘raping the planet’.
[as an aside: If we do nothing, ie: no nuclear power, no natural gas, no new refineries, our economy WILL get worse.]
Can we agree that we are to be preaching the gospel to the whole world:
Matthew 24:14 NIV
And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.
I have a black-letter Bible. All the important words are in black.
Sean,
I totally agree with you partially in the environmental matter. But there is nothing we can do to fix completely the global warming, ozone layer, smog consumption or any other major environmental matter affecting the earth. We, as humans can improve the detioration of the earth by diminishing pollution. Every part of the earth (country) has their own humane and social responsability to take care of the earth as temporary residents. This earth was given to us to be cultivated and taken care of -and not to be destroyed. Jesus alluded to this, when he said that in the last days, men will be less caring, showing no love for one another including the earth. Example: if superpower governments are testing nuclear weapons on soil, how can we as civilian avoid this? everyone is responsible for their own actions including social entities and its members. Where there is greediness, love does not exist. God’s precepts about His Divine Plan for this earth and/or humans will be to restore the earth of any pollution or corruption. Jesus himself said to “seek the kingdom and its righteousness, and everything else will be added.” On my personal note, if I am clean in the inside, the outside will most definitely will be a mere reflection of my inside if I apply it in a parallel manner. We can be certained that God has a better place for those who finish the race.
Wally Folgar,
You are raising good points - thanks for participating in the discussion. One thing that I did like about what I have seen of the Green Bible is that it does put a focus on the earth as a good and the center piece of God’s creative work. Certainly He created man for the earth, but He created the earth for man too didn’t He? I think a lot of anti-environment focus that some of the church has had is a result of the whole “go to heaven when you die” theology which certainly isn’t in any Bible - green, red, or black for that matter. The thinking goes that we’re out of here anyway, who cares - its not about the here and now but going to heaven to be with the Lord. While I understand focusing on what is coming and not being tied up with earthly mattes - this line of thinking is not true Biblically, so it might be worth revisiting the practical application of what this false doctrine brought with it.
God has not given up on His original plan - He created the earth and it was VERY GOOD - and though corrupted, it will be restored. And by living restoratively (if that’s a word) we can point to what’s coming in the future perhaps. I don’t recycle or change my light bulbs because I want to save the planet in itself, but because it could be a way to point that I’m not about corruption and decay but restoration and renewal - even in the way I light my living room (plus you can save a few bucks which isn’t bad either!) because my God is into restoration and renewal.
How wonderful would it be if the church took a position on this in light of the coming Kingdom and not just be put on one side or the other of this question without giving it a Kingdom-people perspective.
Dustin,
That is the editorial “we.” See Genesis 1:26.
Hi there,
not too long ago I saw a documentary from the UK in which all the current global warming, save the climate, etc talk was evaluated and found to be a real big hoax ….
Just a few days ago, I received an e-mail from a Christian scientist with an open letter to a secretary in the German government in which the government’s environmental politics and their propaganda of CO2 emission control and global warming, etc were also said to be false and deceptive claims … seeing that the global temperature is actually getting colder on an average over the last few decades …
It seems to me that the world’s governments are once again serving another god of their own making and Christians would be well advised to be sober and watchful and not be taken in by the false information propounded as if they were “facts” …
Cheers,
Wolfgang
PS: here are a few websites dealing with climate hoax ….
http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2007/3412gore_exposed.html
http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/11/11/the-life-and-death-of-a-climate-hoax/
http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/968
Cheers,
Wolfgang
I just checked out the NYtimes article you linked, and it reports that the hoax is that people believe global warming is a hoax. I’m not sure what to believe about this stuff. Has anyone else look into this “global warming is a hoax” stuff?
Hi Sean,
yes … I included that link about folks declaring the hoax to be a hoax as welll so that one can see what type of “back and forth” arguments are being promoted.
To me it seems there are a lot of lies being told by the “global warming” and “save the climate by diminishing CO2 emission”, etc talkers … for one, the industrial emissions of CO2 only amount to a very very small % of the overall CO2 emission … thus, any diminishing of that changes nothing on the overall global climate scene. In addition, there better be some CO2 around, else plants have nothing to produce the oxygen we do need in order to live ….?!!
The “green folks” have been able to successfully introduce the new religion “environmentalism” into many places in the Western world …. and the main promoters are often linked to companies that produce and sell “solar energy”, “wind energy” equipment while finding political support for suppressing other sources which are more efficient and less expensive …
eh, once again, the whole thing really is about “the love of money” and how to “be successful” in that field by means of a “religious touch”
Cheers,
Wolfgang
The artificial markets of “selling environmental credits” is just a way to try and make sure that on the global scale companies aren’t running away with gross amounts of emissions. Basically, if I go over, I must buy someone else’s credits that they aren’t using. Punishing those who go over, rewarding those who are under, while attempting to ensure that at least the status quo remains - with the hope that they can in time lower the number of credits. Of course, this is all skeptical and hopeful and requires accurate testing and reporting. And you can do this for all sorts of things, whether in doubt or not, like CO2, or water (which is seen as an environmental danger without a doubt).
I’ve seen numbers that the world population is responsible for anywhere from 1/2 to 2/3rds of the CO2 being produced. So, according to these results, no matter what we did to industry, the problem is there are just too many people. This is supported by the fact that CO2 levels have doubled from 200 parts per million to 400 parts per million ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4467420.stm )
The whole problem in this debate is that there are claims on both sides, but unless one is actually reading scientific journals, there is no direct evidence that is referenced, and the methods of testing are hidden. So all these internet sites that make big claims are not helpful. Look at scientific journals from the last thirty years if you want to find the truth on the matter.
Hi John O,
the scientific journals are not necessarily that accurate either …. ever thought of that? don’t be fooled by “science” and its supposed facts, or by politicians who either quote “scientific” figures …
Eh, we have a lady with a Dr. in physics as chancellor of our government, and yet it seems that she is unable to go by some rather obvious physics and chemistry facts when it comes to her environmental politics ..
Cheers,
Wolfgang
Wolfgng,
You can’t ust assert things. Of course anything can be wrong. But the only way your going to know is by reading it, looking at the method any learning something. Not by playing armchair criticizer.
It is interesting to notice the change in language on the part of the more popular environmentalists. They no longer use “global warming”, but rather “global climate change.” The reason? The data is showing a cooling period that started many years ago. I think that we can expect more data that shows a cooling trend. The environmentalists will use this change of language to blame global warming, or cooling, whatever the data shows, on man-made activities that they do not like.
For those that are interested in alternate views, I would suggest: “The Skeptical Environmentalist” by Lomborg
“The Chilling Stars” by Svensmark and Calder
“Unstoppable Global Warming” by Singer and Avery
I’m still waiting for our resident hippie, John Smajda to weigh in.
I think we should take care of the planet like we own it…Oh yea our Father does own it. Yup we should take real good care of it.
JimS,
good point. Even if the scientists are wrong and global warming is not actually caused by us burning bazillions of gallons of refined fossil fuels every day, we should still take care of the world God has given us. Even if the world gets toasted in a thousand years in some eschatological, 2 Peter 3 fire we should still take care of it because that’s just the responsible thing to do (and our kids and their kids might appreciate it if the world doesn’t look like an ashtray when they get their turn).
At Victor request,
a quickie,
I started a long post yesterday then accidentally erased it. Very disheartening.
I agree very much with the last two comments.
In regards to climate change, that is not the only issue here. Is the fact that I live 10 minutes away and work within walking distance to a major river and Its strongly advised that I do not eat more than one fish from that river per year just a hoax? Or that its strongly advised not to eat more than 2 servings of fish from anywhere in one week?
Is the fact that you cant see the Hollywood sign from Downtown Los Angelas a hoax?
Is that smell on the New Jersey Turnpike a hoax?
Land fills are filling up, We are running out of places to put garbage. Styrofoam does not break down. There is a finite about of crude oil, so other energy sources must be explored and utilized.
Christians should not be law breakers, racists, bad employees nor polluters. When confronted, we should repent of actions that are irresponsible.
Sean you said the concept of the green bible is ridiculous… would you say the same about a topical bible that focused on lets say the peace movement? Or a topical bible that addresses teen issues?
~JP
John Paul,
I agree, I don’t like pollution and I don’t like litterbugs, but if you can’t see the Hollywood sign, or it’s too polluted where you live, then MOVE!
I currently live in Montana which doesn’t even require an emissions test to license a vehicle. I’m tired of these “save the earth” extremists who live in these densely populated areas (by choice) and complain about air pollution. And to let you know, I grew up in Sacramento, so I understand what it is like to live in a densely populated area. Let’s spell out the facts here, the scientific community rejects the notion of man-made global warming in favor of sunspots as part of our solar systems natural cycle. And who is to say that Global warming is a such a bad deal…
http://www.dailytech.com/A+Melting+Arctic+Happy+News+for+Mankind/article12882.htm
The movement to sell Green bibles is made from wanting the Greenbacks, not from the guise of “saving the earth from ourselves.”
How much of a say does anyone think they really have in these matters? We, as Christians, need to live Christ-like lives in obedience to our Lord. If we do that, we will still pollute the earth, but probably not as much as everybody else. Along the way, we will help bring others to repentance, and they too will not pollute so much.
Actually, those of us who claim to be believers who live in North America or Europe cause a lot more pollution than people in other parts of the world. Does that make us greater sinners? If you choose to live a life that does not cause pollution, then don’t drive a car, or use electricity; don’t accept medical treatment and especially don’t use your computer!
When it comes to some of the other aspects of this discussion, one thing I like to keep in mind is that somewhere the Scriptures it says something about all men being liars.
Personally, I have never heard Christians say “Let’s trash the planet because it’s all going to burn anyway. and besides, I’m going to heaven.” We live in a cursed world, and people are desperate to alleviate the harshness of this life. Until Christ returns and God’s restoration process begins, the measures people take will always have negative consequences.
Alone, none. But together, prepared to sacrifice and work hard - we can turn the world upside down.
Joseph,
Again what I indicated is that anyone on any side can say literally anything. I don’t see any research journals quoted in that news article that would actually break down the experiments, results, and analyze it coming to a conclusion. Why should I believe that, rather than the other side? Keep in mind - I don’t actually believe either sides crazy claims. But I do believe we need to do something - if not only for the reasons JohnS put out there - the visible effects I can actually see.
Joseph,
I’m not trying to be rude, but are you a christian? This is a Christian website and as such, I would think what we are working towards finding out what Christ would have us do on these issues, and I don’t think Jesus would have said if you dont like it move.
~JP
JohnO,
I agree that the science on the issue is still in the state of Theory. But, it seems as though a carbon credit would be going beyond what the science is telling us and creeping up on our freedoms in our own environment. The question is then, why don’t the leaders of the Green movement focus on the visible areas first, instead of calling it a Worldwide epidemic? To them, even if you drive a car, you are part of the problem. What I’m saying is that most people that complain about the earth being polluted live in densely populated areas, taking their small picture of our earth, and throwing it out to the rest of the world. Evidence shows from our earliest recorded temperature records that we go through cold and hot phases.
I have lived in cities that pollute and liter, it doesn’t look good. I personally take care of my own property, and when I go out into the woods make sure to pack up my mess. In my opinion, if the “Green movement” wants to make a difference on the earth, they should be fighting for environmental personal responsibility, rather than the shaky theory of global warming.
John Paul,
I’m not sure that questioning if someone is a Christian is the right way to go. If you believe that Joseph has been sinful in his remarks, the lovingly reprove him as a brother. We need to watch that we are not so quick to judge others as unbelievers.
JohnO
Who is the “we” and what is the “hard work” that is to be done?
John Paul,
If I came off in a threatening manner to your response, then I apologize. But the question is relevant, if those who believe that they are part of the pollution problem in the area they live in, they should move. Areas like Hollywood and LA are almost impossible to live without a vehicle and pollution is inevitable.
You bring up a good point, what would Christ have said about the issues of today concerning global warming. Is concentrated sewage pollution? Yes. Did Christ ever talk about the Romans not getting rid of their sewage in a proper manner? No. I think that Christ would have taken a rational approach and taught personal responsibility towards ones surroundings. That means using common sense like don’t throw solvents into the lakes and streams.
Joseph,
Did Christ ever live in a large Roman city where there was actually a sewage problem? No. Moreover the only forms of ’sewage’ Jesus would have ever encountered would have been bio-waste that easily degrades and is actually helpful to the environment (fertilizer).
Brian,
The ‘we’ is both us Christians, and the rest of the world. The ‘hard work’ is actually inventing alternate forms of energy that are viable, reducing our impact on the environment (carbon footprint), paying more to get the same electricity/transportation because it is cleaner. Those of us who are involved in businesses, creating less waste of paper and packaging. Those of us in economic areas, creating policy that rewards/allows alternative energy research to be supported by the market (currently it is not).
Joseph again,
Pollution is not a freedom, and any form of carbon credits is being used in commercial settings. So, if you do own a business that is industrial/production in nature - you should be following the laws of the land and taking care of the earth. In fact, you should be taking care of God’s Earth better than the “heathen” who think it is just their earth. All science is in the state of theory. Don’t use “theory” as a pejorative/condescending term.
Brian,
This is a public and somewhat anonymous forum. Not everybody who posts is a christian nor has to be. I don’t assume people are christian. I don’t know Joseph and when I clicked on his name the link didn’t not go to a website that gave me any indication that he was christian nor was did anything he said give me any indication either. The question I asked was so I could find out if he was a brother. I really don’t think I judged him, I asked a honest question to gauge wither or not i should hold him to the standards laid out in scripture, to do otherwise I believe is wrong.
This is not what you said in post 21. What you said is if you don’t like how much your neighbors are polluting around you you should move: “it’s too polluted where you live, then MOVE!”
And, also i think the question at hand is wither or not we as Christians should be concerned if we are those polluters.
Also my point in bringing up Christ was what he would not have told people if they don’t like what he was doing to their neighborhood to move.
But going with what you said, I do agree that he would have taught personal responsibility. But like JohnO said, at the time… Sewage wasn’t an issue.
I have heard arguments for and against global warming. Though one program that was shown on the Weather Channel said that due to global warming the effect will eventually be global cooling and an eventual ice age.
One other argument is that a cows manure puts out more CO2 than an automobile over the course of a year. This I learned when California was attempting to limit the amount of cows per acre to reduce consentrated CO2.
Personally, I think we should be good stewarts of what God has given us. For example: I owned a trucking company until this last week. I was responsible to dispose of the oil in a way that I didn’t pollute ground water. I had to continually tune the trucks to get te best fuel milage. This was to use less fuel, burn it completely rather than loose it on the road.
As individuals this should be true too. We should keep our cars tuned up. Properly inflated tires. And so on.
It doesn’t take much to be mature and responsible. Look around and do the simple things. It is not a real difficult thing to do and not worth arguing over.
It would be a better use of electricity to discuss and share ways to be responsible stewarts of this earth. Rather than disputing global warming or climate change issues.
Mark E. DeYoung
John Paul,
No, I said, “I agree, I don’t like pollution and I don’t like litterbugs, but if you can’t see the Hollywood sign, or it’s too polluted where you live, then MOVE!”
I stand by my statement, in your examples you pointed out densely populated areas as results of pollution. Would you agree that this is inevitable? If so, then why are you complaining, just move away. I’m not talking about blatant criminal dumping. Just take a look at LA, how do you suppose that this tech-city can thrive without the burning of gas and oil?
So, if the river you live near is too polluted as result of the polluted combined efforts of the culture in your area, then go fishing somewhere where the rivers are healthy. There are thousands of clean rivers and lakes in the US. If you drive a car, heat your house, use any type of electronic, then you are part of the problem.
I like what Mark D. had to say, let’s take what we have now, make better use of it, and go about finding new ways to improve the conditions of our surroundings.
It’s not a sin to drive a car, or turn the heat up in your house, or even cut the trees down to make a living.
I think that you need to better define what you mean by one being a “polluter?”
JohnO,
Exactly my point, Christ wasn’t living in these densely populated areas which is why it was a non-issue. But if you were living in Rome you would have had some issues with pollution. One could argue the same scenario is happening today.
http://www.eh-resources.org/timeline/timeline_roman.html
You need to define what you mean by pollution. Also, pollution becomes a freedom when a shady theory is defining what we can and can’t do in respect to the environment. This is why I don’t think anyone deserves a carbon credit. I own a small painting business and use different types of lacquers and solvents all the time. I could dump my waste where I please, but I choose to dispose of it through a city program that takes care of these types of chemicals. Instead of a Fed. Gov. made program of carbon credits, the people should charge the costumer for the proper maintenance and disposal of carbon based products and by-products. If one is comfortable by leaving the heat on in there house at 80 degrees all winter, then so be it, it is not your right or my right to tell them different. Don’t get me wrong, there are limits of excess. I’m not saying that one should leave the heat on in there house on 80 degrees if they are away for a long period of time or turn the heat up to 90 and open the windows. To me, “global warming” and going “green” is a non-issue. I don’t want someone who lives in a densely populated area to tell me how I’m going to use the earth’s resources because it’s to smoggy in their neck of the woods.
Thank you mark that was an excellent post.
John Paul,
You don’t recognize Michael Savage as a defender of the Christian faith? Although I don’t agree on all issues with Michael, he is the-man for the defense of Judeo-Christianity in this country. Michael is always bringing up the issues of attack and bias against Christianity within our own borders when others don’t dare.
John Paul
I’m sorry if I misread your “tone.” Of course that’s one of the weaknesses of this type of discourse. It’s hard to get a sense of the attitude or emotion that is behind what is written. In having read your initial comment and then your response to Joseph, I did get the sense that you were judging his response as unchristian. I think that’s one of the things that makes the topic of this discussion difficult.
We would all agree that there is no verse in the Bible that specifically states don’t pollute the planet and that Jesus never addressed global warming/global climate-change/global cooling. So we need to draw our conclusions from the ethics and directions that we do get from the Scriptures. This is where it can get sticky because an inference that might seem obvious to one person might not seem so obvious to another. In the category of the environment this can happen quite easily and so there needs to be forbearance on the part of those involved. The challenge of walking in the ways of Jesus Christ is big enough for me without someone putting on an extra burden that might not really be there.
The realm of environmentalism is filled with so many divergent interests, political motivation, socialistic implications, etc. etc. that it can make it difficult to honestly discuss among Christians without stepping over the line.
Global warming or global reactive deterioration can be seen when you see the North Pole loosing their glaciers and polar bears dying because they can’t survive in these changing weather conditions. The facts are that ice glaciers are melting in the highland places. How do scientist explains this? We go back to square one. It is an environmental problem affecting the earth somehow. There must be an explanation to all this right? On the other hand, when people feel that the earth is an important thing in their life… almost “spirituality for them”, that is a different issue. Native Americans feel that way, the earth is an ingredient to their religious beliefs. Some spiritualistics religions (spiritism) also believe in the earth or (gaia) as part of a cosmic reaction organism where they find spiritual connection. I respect their way of seeing things. In a way, they see the earth as a veneration or indirectly idolizing it. Nature is another way of mystism and enlightment for them. On my opinion, talking about the earth in a scientific or social way is a more realistic topic than any other connotation construed as spiritual-based view. I remember when Jesus said, ” Is it more worthy a man than a couple of birds” when he talked about the relationship of God and men. In turn, Jesus also said that God knows when one of these little ones fall on the ground” Well, God has in mind every living creature that he created, but God knows what is more important for him relatively to his purposes. Earth is a beautiful place to live in but why not…take care of it then? I can give a perfect scientific explanation but how beneficial is this to fix the environmental issues? None, on my opinion! Governments play a big role on this, not just a social responsibility.
and I repeat, im not sure that is a loving response. You are assuming that I or others have the means to move, and if I am not mistaken, that the pollution that is effecting me is not something that the polluter (or collective polluters) are not responsible for. In my case I live down stream from both a densely populated area (the New York capital region) and more notably a chemical plant (GE) way up river. You bring up the population density of LA however, New york City has 3 times the population density that LA has and yet I can see the Manhattan skyline from Yonkers.
How this is achieved? Im not 100% but it might have something to do with the amazing mass transit system in NYC. (where families might own one car.)
This is not actually what I am talking about. Im talking about doing these things keeping in mind that doing them irresponsibly can lead to problems. Dispose of the electronics properly (florescent bulbs, for example, great energy savers, but should be disposed of by other means than landfills and barges.) You might find it surprising that I am all for building nuclear plants and drilling, but more importantly, we should ask people to utilize these resources more wisely. I think you agree with this to based on what you said here.
To define polluter I went to the dictionary
Pol*lut”er\, n. One who pollutes
ok thats no help.
pol·lute
to make foul or unclean, esp. with harmful chemical or waste products; dirty
and just for clarity sake i would not label one a polluter everyone who does the things you mention above, however I believe what people who are calling a christians to be Green are asking is to be conscious and responsible for with regards to the environment, and those who do not, I have no problem labeling as a “polluter” Whatever the weight of that label means.
and finally
No, im sorry but i don’t. I recognize him as a political commentator, because first and foremost thats what he seems to be (even after a quick internet search). I don’t really pay much interest to the world of politics surprisingly but i have heard of him and when I hear his name, “conservative talk show host” comes to my mind. Now usually some judeo christian values come along with that title, but no, I didn’t believe that because you or anyone else are a fan of this man, I should automatically think that they are a christian.
Should I believe this?
After looking around his website very quickly, I see some articles about christians being persecuted in other countries, but I really dont have to be a Christian to be concerned about human/religious rights and freedoms. Im writing to much about this. I will say, if you can give me a good reason why I should assume that fans of Mike Savage are christians, I will think of them as a brother. However, from what I have read, Mike Savage himself is not even a Christian but a Jew.
We may be in for a period of global cooling:
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2008/10/20/lorne-gunter-thirty-years-of-warmer-temperatures-go-poof.aspx
Hi, my name is Dustin and I work with a Christian environmental organization called Christians in Conservation: A Rocha USA. I noticed that you mentioned Dr. Matthew Sleeth in your post, and I thought that you might like to know that our organization sponsors him as a “creation care evangelist.” We would love for you to check us out at our website, en.arocha.org/usa. You might also be interested the website for Dr. Sleeth’s book “Serve God, Save the Planet,” which can be found at www.servegodsavetheplanet.org.