11 Responses to “Evangelical “Climate Experts””

1. By Judah on Jul 31, 2006

   I am wondering if that issue isn’t just a fashionable avoidance of more important things.

   Why I say that is because the Episcopalian Church at it’s recent convention whereby it appointed a new Presiding Bishop who is a woman agreeable to the ordination of more woman and practising homosexuals, who prayed to a female Jesus, and as a body could not bring themselves to acknowledge Jesus Christ as Lord, elevated instead to a main issue that of climatology and concern for the planet. The fact that their heretical position (from a conservative/orthodox exegesis of Scripture) was tearing the Anglican Communion asunder was better avoided, I guess. Yes, climatology is very trendy these days, and oh so PC.

   Maybe you have a right to be a tad irritable when pastors and theologians roll up their sleeves on some things and not just to help with the chores.

2. By Kevin Bussey on Aug 1, 2006

   Tree huggers!

3. By Judah on Aug 1, 2006

   I’ve hugged a tree.

   We were drving through down-town Detroit, Michigan, and hating it. As soon as we got to Dearborn and a parking lot with big trees, I jumped out of the car and hugged the nearest poor unsuspecting specimen. I just had to! Tree therapy is a real godsend at times.

4. By Bob Cleveland on Aug 2, 2006

   Then I am too.

   I get really tired of hearing folks wanting to use collective political power in the name of the Lord. I see that nowhere in the Bible.

   Nowhere. I wish someone would prove me wrong, as I’ve been in politics and think I could make some hay.

   Unless I’m wrong, I think the pharisees were known to link the religious beliefs to the peoples’ pocketbooks, to motivate them to do their bidding. Witness the rancor they stirred up at the healing of the girl with a spirit of divination. It hit them in the wallet, and they used religious tenets as the excuse to motivate the crowd.

   Christians should be involved in any action they believe in. Just don’t get together and do it in Jesus’ name, with a mob mentality.

5. By John on Aug 2, 2006

   Judah… I think you’ve got a good point. It wouldn’t surprise me if some are using these issues as a diversionary tactic.

   Bob… I couldn’t have said it better myself. This kind of thing seems so pharisaical.

   Kevin… I wish this were just a tree hugger issue… they’re much less infuriating than Pharisees. Oh, and they’ve got a website that can be pretty entertaining, too…

6. By Alan Cross on Aug 2, 2006

   Hey John, I thought I’d comment here since you brought it up. I do think that it is possible to have your own views on these issues and not be part of a “mob mentality.” I don’t see environmental issues as political issues at all, but rather as a stewardship issue (Genesis 1). I think that we should care for our environment. Once again, I am TOTALLY frustrated with there either being a liberal or conservative view on things. Can’t there just be truth? Can’t we recognize that we need to conserve a bit more since we, as Americans make up 5% of the world’s population but use 25% of it’s oil? That is not a political statement. That is a statement regarding materialism, selfishness, and greed, which I think the Bible speaks to quite a bit. We always have to have more, yet Christians, on average, give 2% of our incomes to church ministries. That attitude affects our environment, our communities, our marriages and families, and our spiritual lives.

   I’m a lifelong conservative and have always looked detrimentally toward the environmentalists. At this point, however, I’m just looking for balance on issues and am frustrated with the conservative (i.e. evangelical) party line on everything.

   Thanks for your perspective. It really does sharpen me to think about these things from all viewpoints.

7. By John on Aug 3, 2006

   Alan,

   I hear what you’re saying, but disagree on one point… simply that environmental issues are not just a stewardship issue. An individual’s response is a stewardship issue, yes… but setting public policy is definitely a political issue on top of that.

   I think that’s where I get most frustrated here… that groups of evangelicals are wading into the political arena with these coalitions promoting certain public policy responses. What bothers me most about this is that we have two sets of evangelicals… both no doubt espousing the same things about the importance of faith in Christ, and both pointing out that environmental stewardship would seem to be a Biblical value… but dividing believers over their particular convictions about the best political response to the stewardship question.

   Now, I certainly am no expert on knowing where to draw the line when it comes to Christian involvement in political processes. I guess I just believe that where the Bible is clear, we should be clear, but where the implementation of Biblical values is not clear, we should not be dogmatic or divisive. To me, the actions of these coalitions fits the latter of these categories.

   That’s not to say that we shouldn’t be vocal about stewardship, of course… just that we should not be divisive in dictating the specifics of how to go about being a good steward. Perhaps education (rather than advocacy) is the best course.

8. By Alan Cross on Aug 3, 2006

   I think we pretty effectively pick and choose which political issues we think it’s right to be involved in, don’t you? For instance, during the 1950′s and 1960′s and the battle over segregation in the South, Baptists were almost unanimous that we should not be involved in political or social issues. We should stay out of it and spend time evangelizing. We were also firmly behind separation of church and state and the giving of any funds to Catholic parochial schools as a violation of that. I’ve read the writings of the editors of state baptist newspapers during that time advocating both positions.

   Then, in the 1970′s all of a sudden the Moral Majority starts and it’s time to bring God back into the public schools and we become politically involved. Basically, as long as the situation was working for us, we didn’t want to get involved in political issues. As soon as the tables turned, we are suddenly involved up to our eyeballs. Interesting. Maybe power and our way of life was more important than truth.

   Let it known that I have no faith in politics and have no interest in it. It’s a black hole. However, I do think that we can look at certain issues and advocate public policy. We do it on virtually everything else. To carry your thinking out to it’s logical end would mean that we don’t address issues for fear of being divisive. I can see your point to an extent, because I don’t really see a political or public policy mandate in the Bible, but, at the same time, we would have a long way to go to be consistent on that issue. What about abortion? Gay Marriage? Moral issues? I might be misunderstanding you or taking your words too far, and if so, I apologize.

   I put no faith in politics. I just think that there are issues that are worth speaking to as Christians from time to time. It doesn’t mean that there is only one view. Of course not. But, I do think it’s a good thing to be involved from a stewardship point on this issue.

   I think I understand what you are saying and see your point. Forgive me if I’ve mischaracterized your words. As I said before, I do not agree with the environmental extremists. However, I do think this has become an issue and bears a measured response. I don’t think that we should segment life into the sacred and the secular, either. I think that we can speak to these issues from a Biblical worldview. You’re right, maybe we do need education and debate. Followed, I would say, by reasonable action.

   Wow. I said a lot to basically agree with your last point!

9. By John on Aug 3, 2006

   Funny thing, Alan… when I was composing my last comment in this thread, I wrote and wrote and pretty much came to the point of arguing FOR political involvement by Christians. I had to go back and edit a bit to refine my thoughts. Point is, I can go either way on this depending on how I’m thinking at the current moment… there are very good arguments for political involvement, and there are very good arguments for staying out of such.

   I think the last couple paragraphs of my last comment is really what this issue should boil down to though… where the Bible is clear, we should be clear (and vocal). So… taking a political stand against abortion or against gay marriage, given that these stances against these are consistent with orthodox understandings of Biblical teaching (there are, of course, some who would argue that the Bible supports these or at least is silent on these matters), would seem acceptable, if not expected. The rub is how we take that political stance in a God-honoring way.

   On other issues that are less clear-cut Biblically, I think education and dialogue is the best stance. It’s one thing to come out and say, “this is what you should do or believe”, and another to say, “this is why I think we should do something, and why I believe it’s best”. Advocacy argues strongly for a certain position… education gives the reasons why one believes we should take a position, but does not try to make that decision for someone else. Advocacy generally creates division and debate… education (at least hopefully) enables understanding. It’s a fine line, no doubt, but one I believe is important.

   Anyway, I’d better wrap this up. I sound WAY too much like a politician…

10. By Alan Cross on Aug 3, 2006

    Thanks for the dialogue, John. I enjoyed it. I would only add that education should lead to action of some kind. Maybe it’s just action that we leave to the individual on things that are not cut and dried. God bless and I appreciate you!

11. By John on Aug 4, 2006

    I agree, Alan. Action on things that aren’t crystal clear should be left to the individual, at least in my opinion. Very much like the Baptist debate over alcohol!

    Anyway, good discussion… I enjoyed it as well!

Sorry, comments for this entry are closed at this time.