Stones Cry Out

The Stop Global Warming Virtual March is a non-partisan effort to bring all Americans together in one place to prove that global warming is here now... and, it is time for us to do something about it.
One person can can change the world. Over 275,000 people have already joined. Imagine what millions of marchers can do! Together we will be heard.
Join the March Now!
www.stopglobalwarming.org
Its easy! - No cost, No hassles. There is every reason in the world to become a virtual marcher. Why? Because it affects our public health, our national security, our economy, our planet's future.
Our mission is to use the strength of our numbers to urge 1) Our government to join the rest of the world in addressing global warming, and 2) American business to start a new industrial revolution on clean energy products that reduce our dependence on oil and other global warming pollution.

Good luck. We're all counting on you.

I'm still wondering what Bush and Halliburton did to cause the wild fluctuations in climate from 40 million to 10,000 years ago.

To those who have labeled Bush as stupid, how did he have the smarts to ruin the planet. Make up your mind.

1. I haven't labeled Bush stupid (although I don't think he's the brightest president we've had).

2. One doessn't have to be bright to destroy things. One need only to be short-sighted and/or selfish and irresponsible.

3. Bush isn't destroying things himself. It takes the cooperation of millions of regular folk to do that.

These ads are offensive to the cause of Christ.

There you have it: Jesus giving us his definitive word! Thanks, Jesus, aka JohnH.

I dunno, though. Them saying:

“With the same love of God and neighbor that compels us to preach salvation through Jesus Christ...and take the whole Gospel to a hurting world, we the undersigned evangelical leaders resolve to come together with others of like mind to pray and to work to stop global warming.”

Sounds reasonable and Christlike enough to me.

JohnH, has it occurred to you that pollution can be a matter of justice and love? I act for a cleaner world not because I love the plants and hug the trees (although I do love God's Creation and how God speaks to me through it), I do so primarily as a way to show my love for my brothers and my sisters, my children and yours that will inherit God's green earth.

How can that be offensive to the cause of Christ?

You can disagree with this position, but how are the ads offensive to the cause of Christ?

Jim Jewell

C'mon Dan. Disagreeing with you is on par with usurping the Son of God? John says it's offensive and you say it's not. Can't we discuss things without this bit of over-the-top rhetoric?

Here's my issue, personally. I'm all for conservation. I agree with you that pollution is poor stewardship of the resources and gifts that God has given us through the earth. No argument there. The problem is when this group uses this phrase:

"...to pray and to work to stop global warming."

I find that phrase as pointless and futile as saying "to pray and to work to stop all earthquakes" or "to pray and to work to speed up photosynthesis". The earth's been warming and cooling for a good long time. The Vikings were farming wheat on the coast of Greenland 1000 years ago, slightly before the SUV arrived on the scene. 400 years ago, the Thames would freeze over. Wide changes in temperature with no oil industry to blame. And yet this statement assumes that mankind is the sole fault and therefore the sole "cure" for this particular increase in temperatures. (The linked report suggests the Sun is more to blame, actually.)

They didn't just say "slow global warming", if indeed man really has an effect on it; they're out to halt it completely. Have we come to the point that we believe we can bend nature completely to our will, and we're willing to expend resources and energy in the effort to do so?

There are a number of names on this list whom I respect (including those of the denomination I grew up in and my college alma mater). I have no doubt of their sincerity of stewardship. But I do question the wisdom of a statement such as this that says more than I think they meant to say, and will be used by extremists as propaganda in their effort to combat global cooling. (Oh, wait, that was what they said 30 years ago. I meant "warming".) (Doh! I meant "climate change". Sorry for not keeping up with the fashion.)

Will the resources and energy put toward this take away from efforts to evangelize and take Christ to the world (i.e. hurt the cause of Christ)? Not necessarily, but only time will tell. But again, any effort to truly "stop" global warming doesn't sound like a good allocation of funds to me.

"C'mon Dan. Disagreeing with you is on par with usurping the Son of God?"

He started it!

On the global warming issue, as I've said before, if they're using that phrase as a "codeword" for the notion of human's negative impact upon God's earth, then I'm fine with it. I don't think too many informed scientists are talking specifically about global warming but more generally climate change and habitat destruction, then I think they're on safe grounds.

I'll agree with you that, from what I've read (and owning up to being no scientist) that the judge is still out on actual global warming as caused by human activity - not that it's not the case, just that we don't know that it's the case.

I just wish that, when this many folks get together and speak with one voice, that they'd be very careful about the wording. Agreed; if it's a general call for conservation, do it up and say it that way. But as written, it sounds like they're coming out in favor of buzzwords instead of ideas while, as you noted, the judge is still out.

(Bloggger-in-law note: Sorry Jim, but that's my take on it. >grin<)

WOW! Looks like Doug and Dan agree on something. I think all is well said here at the end. These are nice people, and the ads are not offensive. The concern is that these nice people are being used by some with hidden agendas. If so, then when this truth is discovered, their credibility will be damaged, thus adversely affecting the balance of their ministries as well.

What hidden agenda, Bruce? That we want a cleaner environment? Yes, we can agree that working for a clean creation is not anti-God and that we ought to be careful how we phrase our protests, but I don't think it necessary to demean those taking part in this by suggesting they're being "used."

I think he's referring to the extremists I referred to in my post; how they may interpret this as a blanket endorsement of all groups that think we can stop global warming in our time. I think Bruce is worried about the extremists' hidden agenda, not that of the ECI.

Thanks, Doug. Sheesh - I thought we had made peace. To the extremists, environmentalism is their religion, and having the ECI as 'bedfellows' will be 'useful' to them. However, they will want to stay in control of the direction of the 'movement'. When doing so, they will not have the best interests of the ECI or thier other ministries in mind. The ECI people need to be careful. As Doug noted, it appears that their wording is already influenced by these extremists. The ECI must not grant total 'power of attorney' to them and let them speak for the ECI.

I remember Y2K, and several evangelical leaders jumped on that bandwagon as well. It took a long time for them to recover credibility, with a lot of other good ministries as collateral damage.

It's really pretty simple. They're off message.

You think this group of 85 agrees on important Christian doctrines? I doubt it. But, here, on a political issue, it's a cumbuyah moment.

It's not just the wording in the ad, it's the associated images implying that Katrina was more severe because of global warming. The jury is still out on that one. Yet, these guys know there is a connection. Suppose the Holy Spirit revealed it to them?

Look, if it's just being good stewards, I have no quarrel, but it's pretty clear it's much more than that.

So, let me get this straight: let's stop using resources and stop economic development because it will use more fossil fuels (sorry Africa, you lose again), but let's be sure to help the poor who we are going to be sure are poor because we have...

So, who do I listen to, ECI or Bono?

Well, I'd suggest Bono of the two, but the ECI are not doing too badly.

You said:
"You think this group of 85 agrees on important Christian doctrines?"

I'm saying that this IS essential Christian doctrine. You interested in knowing my thinking on the point?

1. Throughout the Bible, God tells God's people to not oppress the poor, to work for justice, to work against oppression, to care for the sick and the weak, the elderly and children.

2. Pollution disproportionately harms the poor, the sick, the elderly, children.

3. Voila! Pollution becomes a matter of justice.

In addition, there is the whole Good Stewart angle and the fact that it's God's world, not ours and the fact that personal responsibility suggests we ought to clean up after ourselves (okay, not strictly biblical, but fitting nonetheless).

On your comment: "let's stop using resources and stop economic development because it will use more fossil fuels..."

The thing is, we will stop using fossil fuels simply because it is a limited resource. The question is, will we wean us from our dependence/addiction upon the oil wisely or will we do so in a clumsy, last-minute way that will, again, cause even greater pain for the poor than the rest of us?

One quick thing, bruce. I don't think necessarily that the wording was influenced by those extremists. I just think they'll be more than willing to pounce on the situation and use it to their advantage.

Dan:

Lack of economic development disproportionately hurts the poor as well.

But, your putting this into the realm of essential Christian doctrine merely proves that you are as far off message as this gang of 85.

Oh, I know economic policies and development or lack thereof can hurt the poor. But so can bad economic development.

In my community, the powers that be "blessed" the poor folk of the city with the economic development of job-producing factories. Factories that helped increase the incidence of cancer.

"Woe to those who enact unjust statutes and who write oppressive decrees, Depriving the needy of judgment and robbing my people's poor of their rights, Making widows their plunder, and orphans their prey! What will you do on the day of punishment, when ruin comes from afar? To whom will you flee for help? Where will you leave your wealth?"

Isaiah 10

Well, since you seem to be so superior to the rest of us Dan, why don't you enlighten us as to how to solve world poverty?

Those people in your city? What would you have them do?

What have I said that suggests I think I'm superior? I'm just another sinner trying to follow Jesus, just another citizen with fallible opinions about what I think are the most reasonable policies.

That said, I have a few ideas. Perhaps they're wrong, I don't know. But they seem appropriate starting points to me.

1. Reducing our massive military budget (it's larger than the next 20+ nations combined) by half (~$300 billion) seems a reasonable start.
2. Return a third of that ($100 billion) to the taxpayers (so they can give to charity if they so choose or otherwise invest in their communities)
3. Investing the remaining $200 billion in global aid would go a long way towards alleviating poverty and starvation, which in turn would go a long way towards world peace.

I could go on, but the point is we've chosen to invest our money in more militaristic ways. We're the most powerful nation in the world. We're responsible for our actions.

What would I have the folk in my community do? Organize, strengthen the laws that are currently allowing toxins in the air in their neighborhood to not allow so much as to be dangerous.

And that's what they did, what we did.

You know what our state congress is doing now in response (as led by a conservative republican)? Creating a law that would not allow our toxified neighborhoods to decide for themselves how much toxin they want in the air!!

Forget compassion. Forget personal responsiblity. Forget local autonomy and democracy! Let the factories smoke on! It's their gov't, after all, they bought and paid for it.

Where is Jesus in all that?

I'll tell you where I think he is: On the front lines with those protesting this assault on our poor and on our democracy.