Climate Change and Christians

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Martin, Mar 14, 2007.

  1. Martin

    Martin
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    Messages:
    5,228
    Likes Received:
    0
    I suppose this is the right forum since this comment will be directed towards political views.

    Why are some conservative Christian so opposed to the idea of global warming? Is there something in the Bible that contradicts the idea that abusing the earth may bring about negative results?

    From what I know it seems to me that the earth's climate goes in cycles. The planet will go through warmer periods and colder periods. Those cycles are a natural part of this planet's life cycle. Since that is the case a simple warming in tempature trends does not equal global warming. So I am not sure I can accept the current "sky is falling, Al Gore, global warming" ideas. After all we can look back over many years and see how the hyper global warming crowd has been wrong about the horrible future. I mean, aren't we suppose to be living in bubbles by now?

    Having said that I do believe that human abuse is hurting the planet and that may in fact worsen any climatological cycles that the earth goes through. That worsening would certainly have a negative effect on our lives.

    I really wish I knew more about these issues. Back in college I wanted to enter the field of climatology or meteorology. However after taking an introductory climatology class I judged myself too mathematically challenged for those fields. :laugh: Even so weather still fascinates me. I love to learn about the causes of severe weather (hurricanes, tornadoes, etc).
     
  2. 2 Timothy2:1-4

    2 Timothy2:1-4
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2006
    Messages:
    2,879
    Likes Received:
    0

    GW is a small part of a larger socialism picture. GW, animal rights, womens rights, population control are all related. It is inthe end about destroying capitalism. GW cannot be seen as an individual issue. It is not.
     
  3. Martin

    Martin
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    Messages:
    5,228
    Likes Received:
    0
    ==Be that as it may I am looking at it as a single issue. I am interested in the facts on the climate and whether or not human activity might cause natural climatological cycles to become more extreme and thus harmful to humans. Simply because some left wing nut cases have hijacked a theory does not mean the whole theory is wrong. The same is true with animal rights and women's rights. I support both of those ideas yet I realize that many left wing, unChristian folks have taken those things to unhealthy extremes. So a theory or idea is not wrong simply because it has been misused or abused. You may be interested to learn that William Wilberforce was a animal rights activist.
     
    #3 Martin, Mar 14, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 14, 2007
  4. 2 Timothy2:1-4

    2 Timothy2:1-4
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2006
    Messages:
    2,879
    Likes Received:
    0

    Animal rights are rediculous. And it is not just a few who use global warming as a socialistic tool. It is a broad spread action. It is a major tool of the UN as well as the others I mentioned. These theories such as global warming are set up as single issues so as to hide the bigger goal. But try as we might they are not real and they are not seperate issues.
     
  5. Rufus_1611

    Rufus_1611
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2006
    Messages:
    3,006
    Likes Received:
    0
    I suspect there are three story lines here.

    The first would be the Al Gore Man-made global warming religion that he is promoting. The "science" behind this effort has been shown to be fraught with error and it is highly inconceivable that man is responsible for the conditions of the globe. However, I suspect many will follow this belief system for it is being promoted with great effectiveness and resources.

    The second is global warming is real but it is cyclical and don't worry as the cycle will change. While there is some solid arguments to this contention much of it fails against a Biblical worldview as these same scientists will be saying things like "hundreds of thousands of years ago" or "millions of years ago".

    The third and the one I am partial to is...this world has now been in existence for 6,000 years and this world will shortly be giving way to a thousand year rest / millenial reign of Christ. What we are seeing in this warming is a foreshadow of the fourth angel being given power to scorch men with fire via the sun. An additional foreshadowing is relative to the people blaspheming God and not repenting and not giving Him glory, for few are discussing this as a judgment of God.
     
  6. North Carolina Tentmaker

    North Carolina Tentmaker
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2003
    Messages:
    2,355
    Likes Received:
    0
    Martin:

    If you want to talk about being good stewards of the earth the bible does address that issue. You can go back to Genesis 1:28 and show that mankind was given dominion over the earth. You can go to Genesis 2:15 where Adam was given charge of the Garden of Eden to dress it and keep it. If your concern is that as Christians we should be faithful stewards of this world God has given us and use its resources wisely then I think you would have lots of support from conservative Christians.

    However, if your concern is that we need to curtail development and economic activity because we are somehow harming the earth then I think you have moved from a moral argument to a political one and you will find lots of disagreement from political conservatives. If you take your concerns from a suggestion of “you should” to a demand of “you must, or the government will force you,” well then you have stepped into the area of infringing upon my personal liberty and freedom and you will find lots of hostility.
     
  7. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,906
    Likes Received:
    295
    I'm not against the idea at all. It's simply unsettled science.

    One thing that makes me wary is the concentrated effort by advocates of global warming to silence the opposition. Not prove them wrong, but silence them.
     
  8. Martin

    Martin
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    Messages:
    5,228
    Likes Received:
    0
    =="Then God said, Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth" Gen 1:26

    "A righteous man has regard for the life of his animal, but even the compassion of the wicked is cruel." Prov 12:10

    Seems to me that we are to rule over the earth, to take care of it, and it seems that animals are part of that. Therefore treating animals rightly (ie...animal rights) is not "rediculous" according to God. I am not talking about giving animals "human rights" I am simply talking about treating animals right.


    ==So? That is not even the issue. There are millions who abuse "grace" as an excuse to sin. Does that mean grace is a bad thing? No! It is a great thing. Simply because people, even millions, abuse something does not mean that it is bad. I am interested in the hard/cold facts of climate change and I am not interested in ignoring it simply because some have abused it.

    The question still remains, and it is a good one, could man's abuse of God's creation cause the good and natural climatological cycles to become dangerously extreme?
     
    #8 Martin, Mar 14, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 14, 2007
  9. Martin

    Martin
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    Messages:
    5,228
    Likes Received:
    0
    ==I reject number one and I don't agree with number two's millions of years. However I am not sure that there needs to be millions of years in order to have climatological cycles. I find your number three here to be very interesting. I have honestly never thought about that before, and it was not the direction I was heading in, but you may be on to something. :thumbs:
     
  10. Martin

    Martin
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    Messages:
    5,228
    Likes Received:
    0
    ==Really I am just wondering why some Christians get hostile at the suggestion that abusing the creation may have negative climatological results. As for governmental enforcement of enviornmental regulations I don't believe in that. I am a firm believer in a very small federal government. I agree with Jefferson that the government that governs the least governs the best. I am really focusing on the abuse of God's creation and the results that may have.

    As for slowing economic growth, well, people need to be responsible. We should not just clear cut forests, upon forests, upon forests. Why? It's not good stewardship of our resources and it take a pretty landscape and turns it into nothing. For example I live in a vacation area with woods and very nice lakes (you being from NC I am sure you know the area). However developers are coming in and throwing up campgrounds, condos, neighborhoods, and fun parks. The result is that the lakes are over crowded with boats, the water smells like gas by mid July, fish wash up dead by the truck loads almost every year, white foam floats on the water, and beer cans are everywhere. Back in 2000 the muck in the water was so thick ducks were literally walking on the water in a few locations. That is not good for people's health, animals, or the lakes/forests. If something is not done this place will not be worth spitting in come twenty years from now. So I do believe that our local government (county/city) needs to start some form of growth control before the whole place is ruined. That is as far as I am willing to go with government getting involved (local interests, local representation and control). Beyond that people need to think about things. Is building another campground here worth destroying the pretty landscape and causing over-crowding in the summer?
     
    #10 Martin, Mar 14, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 14, 2007
  11. Baptist in Richmond

    Baptist in Richmond
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2003
    Messages:
    5,075
    Likes Received:
    4
    Hey,

    I trust that all is well with you. You are in my prayers daily and I hope that all is well with you and yours.

    Please expound upon the point in bold.

    Thanks, and an honest wish for God's Blessings to you,
    BiR (not posting as much due to the BEAUTIFUL weather in the Commonwealth - cannot resist biking downtown Richmond every night after work!!)
     
  12. North Carolina Tentmaker

    North Carolina Tentmaker
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2003
    Messages:
    2,355
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hey BIR, all is well, not great, been a hard week already, but it keeps getting better.

    What I mean by curtail development is really two things. One is just what Martin is talking about. Where we live a lot of new residents and old residents want to stop building. But they are all hypocritical about it. The new residents want their house built, but they want that to be the last one, after that we need to preserve. The old residents that have money don’t want anyone new moving in and heaven forbid if someone wanted to build a manufacturing site. Yes it might employ hundreds of people but it would spoil the few from my front porch and cause traffic.

    The other thing is more global. Like the idiots who are against drilling for oil in the Alaskan refuge or offshore Florida. Much better to fund Islamic terrorists than to develop our own resources. I am not talking about dumping toxic waste into our groundwater or anything dangerous or irresponsible. I just think we should use those resources God has given us.
     
  13. Martin

    Martin
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    Messages:
    5,228
    Likes Received:
    0


    ==It is not about keeping new people out. I don't like tourists but I don't mind new property owners. The problem is over-crowding and the polluting of the lakes. This is more of human health issue. There are people, adults and children, swimming and skiing in these lakes. Go back and read what I said about the current condition. If you get in the water in mid July your eyes will burn because of the gas from the boats (too many boats for lakes this size). And gas is just the start. The campgrounds just bring more people in (mainly tourists) and cause more over-crowding. The secondary problem is the vanishing scenery and animal habitat. But that is a big problem as well. The deer population is dangerously out of control and, because their forests are being destroyed to put up new water parks (why we have water parks around lakes I don't know), they are becoming a major highway hazard. I was driving this past Saturday night on a major highway in this area and the deer were everywhere. On the road, on the side of the road, at the edge of the woods or in areas that were woods a few months ago. I could not see them but I could see their eyes. I was stunned by the number.

    I'm not against us using resources but I am saying we should use these resources wisely and carefully. That way we don't create more problems for ourselves.
     
    #13 Martin, Mar 15, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 15, 2007
  14. 2 Timothy2:1-4

    2 Timothy2:1-4
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2006
    Messages:
    2,879
    Likes Received:
    0

    The proverbs passage has no aplication to what you are trying to assert. The author is comparing the difference between the compassion of the righteous with the unrighteous. It is simply saying the unrighteous have no compassion. It in no way sets a standard for animal treatment. The Genesis passage proclaims the authority over the earth because man is made in the image of God. Again not standard for animal treatment. That is not the context of either passage.





    I never said such a thing. The design behind GW from its inception is a political tool. It is founded out of politics and not science. Therefore it has no credibility and is a lie. Socialists search deep and wide for reasons to insist on change for a capatalists society. GW is at its core political. As is animal rights, abortion and population control.
     
  15. saturneptune

    saturneptune
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    13,977
    Likes Received:
    0
    Martin,
    I conducted a controlled scientific experiment with Christians in Alaska and Christians in Florida. After studying temperatures in the two locations for this last January, I am convinced that Christians in Florida are experiencing global warming.

    Seriously, I agree with NC tentmaker. This earth is a gift of God. We should do reasonable things to keep it clean and preserve what we have. As pointed out above, a good start would be for us all to start picking up after ourselves of the cans and trash. We should replant trees, keep national parks pristine, keep our air and water clean as we can.

    Some of the problem is over use of recreation areas and people acting as pigs and not picking up after themselves. Just using common sense would go a long way. Teddy Roosevelt had some great ideas on this. We sure dont need politicians telling us how to keep the earth clean when they cannot even keep their hearts and minds clean.
     
    #15 saturneptune, Mar 15, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 15, 2007
  16. Martin

    Martin
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    Messages:
    5,228
    Likes Received:
    0
    ==I disagree. The Proverb states very clearly that "a righteous man has regard for the life of his animal". Clearly part of being righteous is treating animals right. A person who abuses animals (kicks dogs, etc) is not righteous.



    ==Of course that is all political concerns that have nothing to do with the reality of climate change or climate cycles. I lean towards cycles and not change. However I do believe that those natural cycles are being negatively affected by pollution (etc). As I said the question still remains if man's abuse of God's creation could cause the good and natural climatological cycles to become dangerously extreme?
     
    #16 Martin, Mar 15, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 15, 2007
  17. 2 Timothy2:1-4

    2 Timothy2:1-4
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2006
    Messages:
    2,879
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is not what this passage says. I would do a concise study of the passage if I were you. It is easy to determine self made ethics and morals and then go to scripture to prove your own standard. But it is out of the authores context.







    No evidence to support it.
     
  18. Martin

    Martin
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    Messages:
    5,228
    Likes Received:
    0
    ==The Proverb states very clearly that "a righteous man has regard for the life of his animal". I don't know how that could be any clearer mainly when understood with the so called creation mandate to rule over the earth. I am well aware of the larger point the author is making. My point is that having regard for the life of your animal is part of the larger point about the righteous person.


    ==No evidence to support what? Climatological cycles? Or pollution worsening, or enhancing, those climatological cycles?
     
  19. Dragoon68

    Dragoon68
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,511
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't accept the extrapolation of a relatively small change, in a relatively small amount of data, for a relatively small locale, over a relatively small amount of time as being conclusive enough to forecast a catastrophe in the making which in turn merits taking all sorts of actions which in themselves have consequences that include undesirable consequences and, most likely, have no impact of the trend in question.

    I question the motives of some of those who're pushing the global warming theories. It seems to constitute a political agenda right in line with a lot of radical environmentalism. Blind endorsement - and the resulting government regulations - could land us a world of hurt much more severe than the warmer weather the advocates are predicting even as we experience some rather harsh winters.

    I suspect that, on a global scale, the earth's temperature is much more impacted by the burning sun and more regulated by its huge mass of rock, water, and air than the sum total of mankind's endeavors.

    I'm completely in favor or responsible use of the earth's resources for mankind's needs and such "responsible" use includes the consumption of some resources - mineral, plant, and animal - in order to provide for our needs and leave what we don't need for future generations to use.

    There is absolutely an impact to any given localized environment and we do need to exercise reasonable care. We also need to be smart economically and politically about our use of natural resources.
     
  20. 2 Timothy2:1-4

    2 Timothy2:1-4
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2006
    Messages:
    2,879
    Likes Received:
    0


    There is no application to mandated animal rights in this passage. Clearly.





    There is no evidence that man is worsening the cycles.
     

Share This Page

Loading...