Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 82 (8871 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 11-16-2018 6:18 AM
202 online now:
AZPaul3, Pressie, Son of Man (3 members, 199 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Son of Man
Post Volume:
Total: 842,039 Year: 16,862/29,783 Month: 850/1,956 Week: 353/331 Day: 12/69 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
2
Author Topic:   Is God okay with the planet being trashed?
GDR
Member
Posts: 4531
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 2.0


Message 16 of 29 (672860)
09-11-2012 11:41 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by Ken Fabos
09-11-2012 11:23 PM


Ken Fabos writes:

GDR may feel a religious obligation to care for the world but does that care rely on science telling him about biodiversity or about the carbon cycle, greenhouse gases and climate?

My religious views, as an orthodox Christian, don't impact my views on science. As I've said before on this forum I consider science to be a natural theology.

Global warming is obviously happening. I don't have the knowledge to be able to disagree or agree as to whether global warming is being caused by CO2 emissions. Reducing emissions certainly can't do any harm and it probably will help. My main concern is that we aren't doing enough to prepare for the results of global warming which is going to happen regardless of how much we reduce our CO2 emissions.

Hope that addresses your concern.


He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.

Micah 6:8


This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Ken Fabos, posted 09-11-2012 11:23 PM Ken Fabos has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by Ken Fabos, posted 09-12-2012 1:14 AM GDR has responded

    
Ken Fabos
Member (Idle past 207 days)
Posts: 51
From: Australia
Joined: 05-09-2010


Message 17 of 29 (672865)
09-12-2012 1:14 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by GDR
09-11-2012 11:41 PM


GDR, thanks for clarification.

I see a challenge for humanity in living sustainably within the limits of the world. It is a test our collective powers of observation, intellect and integrity to understand the true nature of our world; only with honesty and accuracy can observation and intellect and observation give a true understanding of the nature of the world we live in and predict the consequences of our actions with any confidence. It takes trust in long running societal institutions of science and learning and a leap of faith and/or leap of trust to accept and act on that knowledge. It takes moral strength to change behavior or make sacrifices in light of it. It's an all round test of our collective maturity as well as of our ability to understand the nature of the world we live in.

It seems like thinking like that could be shared between many secular, religious and green religious people with only minor differences.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by GDR, posted 09-11-2012 11:41 PM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by GDR, posted 09-12-2012 2:07 AM Ken Fabos has responded

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 4531
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 2.0


Message 18 of 29 (672868)
09-12-2012 2:07 AM
Reply to: Message 17 by Ken Fabos
09-12-2012 1:14 AM


Ken Fabos writes:

It seems like thinking like that could be shared between many secular, religious and green religious people with only minor differences.

The right thing is the right thing regardless of our religious beliefs. IMHO we aren't just responsible for the world as it is today but for the world after all of us are long gone. Having said that, I do have sympathy for those negatively affected when the changes that are required for the future world impact the jobs of lives of those in the present. It's easy to make the hard choices when it isn't one's own life that is being shattered. Some how the pain has to be shared.


He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.

Micah 6:8


This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Ken Fabos, posted 09-12-2012 1:14 AM Ken Fabos has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by Phat, posted 09-12-2012 3:03 PM GDR has responded
 Message 22 by Ken Fabos, posted 09-12-2012 8:11 PM GDR has responded

    
Phat
Member
Posts: 11416
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 19 of 29 (672937)
09-12-2012 3:03 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by GDR
09-12-2012 2:07 AM


Its Not The Planet, Stupid
In my opinion, the planet itself is not of value. The life on the planet is what we are responsible to protect and preserve to the best of our ability.

I don't think we are judged harshly unless we knowingly do wrong.

When we value profits over plant or animal life, we are knowingly doing the wrong thing.

And even if God is not the judge, our collective morality has, as jar would say, a "charge" and a duty.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by GDR, posted 09-12-2012 2:07 AM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by NoNukes, posted 09-12-2012 6:15 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply
 Message 25 by GDR, posted 09-12-2012 10:10 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply
 Message 28 by ringo, posted 09-13-2012 1:44 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
greentwiga
Member (Idle past 1377 days)
Posts: 213
From: Santa
Joined: 06-05-2009


Message 20 of 29 (672938)
09-12-2012 3:25 PM


Back to "is God OK with the planet being trashed" instead of "are Christians OK with the planet being trashed."

Rev 11:18 says God will destroy those who destroy the earth. God is not OK with trashing the earth.

I find that the ones who claim to be Christian but are compromised with politics or big business ignore this passage. They try to claim that mankind is not causing Global warming way beyond the warming that nature is causing. Those people follow exactly the same line as big businesses to justify the businesses not changing their destructive ways.

There are many of us Christians who believe that God not only doesn't approve of Human caused global warming, but all other forms of pollution.


Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by Ken Fabos, posted 09-12-2012 9:37 PM greentwiga has not yet responded

    
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 21 of 29 (672962)
09-12-2012 6:15 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by Phat
09-12-2012 3:03 PM


Re: Its Not The Planet, Stupid
n my opinion, the planet itself is not of value. The life on the planet is what we are responsible to protect and preserve to the best of our ability.

Of course given that we are stuck with preserving the earth if human beings and dolphins are going to survive, I wonder exactly what distinction you are making here. I don't see mankind surviving more than a generation or two after the last polar bear drowns.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison.

Choose silence of all virtues, for by it you hear other men's imperfections, and conceal your own. George Bernard Shaw


This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by Phat, posted 09-12-2012 3:03 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
Ken Fabos
Member (Idle past 207 days)
Posts: 51
From: Australia
Joined: 05-09-2010


Message 22 of 29 (672976)
09-12-2012 8:11 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by GDR
09-12-2012 2:07 AM


"Is God okay with the planet's living contents being trashed" may be more to the point - the initial question does have an element of flippancy but I figure most people will figure it out.

GDR, that overlap, that has people coming at this from different angles sharing views in common interests me. Some important ethical values seem to be in that area of overlap - truthfulness for example. Without the consistency and accuracy that only being honest brings a true understanding of the nature of our world, of it's limits and of the challenges living within them presents will elude us. And without ethical values that understanding will not give us the capacity to face and overcome those challenges.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by GDR, posted 09-12-2012 2:07 AM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by GDR, posted 09-12-2012 10:15 PM Ken Fabos has not yet responded

  
Ken Fabos
Member (Idle past 207 days)
Posts: 51
From: Australia
Joined: 05-09-2010


Message 23 of 29 (672989)
09-12-2012 9:37 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by greentwiga
09-12-2012 3:25 PM


Greentwiga, has the (by past standards unimaginable) wealth and prosperity - and the resultant reductions in human suffering - that our fossil fueled civilisation has achieved helped cement a 'fossil fuels are good' position within religious (as well as well-meaning other) people that resists deeper examination? Whether the total amount of human suffering has actually been reduced, given that a consequence of that wealth and prosperity has been enormous growth in human population is a question too; certainly the numbers of people who live in relative prosperity has grown enormously but the numbers who endure suffering has grown too.

For commerce and business the choice of position to take is decided primarily on the basis of costs, profitability and competitiveness - environmental consequences readily seen as a case of what-will-be-will-be but the regulation and cost imposts on their activities is readily seen as something that can successfully influenced via established tools for influencing government policy and public opinion. The question of the validity of the science matters less in such a decision making processes than perceptions about the validity of science and perceptions are within their ability to influence and change.

That ethical element that values and insists on truth and honesty is not built into the decision making processes of commerce and business so it is incapable of giving a true understanding of consequences. It's collective decisions will be flawed as a result.

For religion and science there is a requirement for high standards of honesty. They seem to share at least that core ethical value in common, one that isn't shared by commerce and industry. But religious people want to reduce human suffering and commerce and industry, with a minimum of restriction and regulation, appears to be most successful at achieving widespread prosperity. But I suggest the absence of core ethical values in common makes commerce and business a poor ally for religion and achieving greater good through such an alliance will be significantly impeded by that absence; commerce has a short term focus and, if it appears to not be in their short term interests there will be motivation to resist deeper examination of the basis of their choices. The mediators, and immediate beneficiaries of that kind of alliance - politicians and political parties - make even less suitable and reliable allies if those values really are core ones.

Edited by Ken Fabos, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by greentwiga, posted 09-12-2012 3:25 PM greentwiga has not yet responded

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 56 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 24 of 29 (672992)
09-12-2012 10:00 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Ken Fabos
09-10-2012 9:53 PM


Trashed?
Responding to your topic title, "Is God okay with the planet being trashed?" --

Can't the most recent scriptural event that qualifies as "trashing" be attributed directly to that same deity? (That would be the global flood ca. 4,350 years ago.)


Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Ken Fabos, posted 09-10-2012 9:53 PM Ken Fabos has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by jar, posted 09-12-2012 10:14 PM Coyote has not yet responded
 Message 29 by Ken Fabos, posted 09-13-2012 5:19 PM Coyote has acknowledged this reply

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 4531
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 2.0


(1)
Message 25 of 29 (672995)
09-12-2012 10:10 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by Phat
09-12-2012 3:03 PM


Re: Its Not The Planet, Stupid
Phat writes:

In my opinion, the planet itself is not of value. The life on the planet is what we are responsible to protect and preserve to the best of our ability.

I think that the planet is of immense value. IMHO it is part of our charge to care for it, and for that matter, obviously what we do with the planet now impacts future life on the planet.

I don't pretend to know how it will all work out but Paul tells us in Ephesians that in the end all things on heaven and all things on earth will be united to form the new world. If it's all things then it matters that we take good care of the place now as it's forever.


He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.

Micah 6:8


This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by Phat, posted 09-12-2012 3:03 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

    
jar
Member
Posts: 30934
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 1.3


Message 26 of 29 (672996)
09-12-2012 10:14 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by Coyote
09-12-2012 10:00 PM


Re: Trashed?
There were many more recent examples of trashing the planet by that character, bringing on plagues of locus, killing all the cows and first born sons, raining frogs, plagues of lice, turning the water into blood, plagues of boils, ten of them in all if I remember correctly.

Oh, and every time the Pharaoh character wanted to end the plagues that character would change Pharaoh's mind so that character could trash some more.

Then there was raining fire down killing everyone in two cities, but that's another story.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Coyote, posted 09-12-2012 10:00 PM Coyote has not yet responded

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 4531
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 2.0


Message 27 of 29 (672997)
09-12-2012 10:15 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by Ken Fabos
09-12-2012 8:11 PM


Ethics and truth, and kindness for that matter, are part of what makes us human. When we move away from the model we give up part of our humanity.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.

Micah 6:8


This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Ken Fabos, posted 09-12-2012 8:11 PM Ken Fabos has not yet responded

    
ringo
Member
Posts: 15577
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.6


(2)
Message 28 of 29 (673064)
09-13-2012 1:44 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by Phat
09-12-2012 3:03 PM


Re: Its Not The Planet, Stupid
Phat writes:

In my opinion, the planet itself is not of value. The life on the planet is what we are responsible to protect and preserve to the best of our ability.


I just got a mental image of Phat sawing off the tree branch that he's sitting on.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by Phat, posted 09-12-2012 3:03 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
Ken Fabos
Member (Idle past 207 days)
Posts: 51
From: Australia
Joined: 05-09-2010


Message 29 of 29 (673092)
09-13-2012 5:19 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by Coyote
09-12-2012 10:00 PM


Re: Trashed?
And a lot of fossil fuels could be considered - via science based 'revelation' - to be the dead leftovers of previous trashings. But if you make something you can trash it if the result is unsatisfying. It doesn't necessarily constitute permission or as an example intended to be emulated.

Seriously though, the range of religious views is very broad and some do count science as revealing important elements of truth about the nature of the world we live in. I'm as interested in the points of agreement as in the points of difference of religious, non-religious and anti-religious people. And as a human being deeply concerned about the consequences of our current behavior on future generations; the opinions (and votes) of religious people appear to have significant real world influence over the acceptance of global environmental problems and the types of solutions needed.

And I'm interested in the actual as well as alleged beliefs and influence of "Green Religion".

Edited by Ken Fabos, : minor edit.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Coyote, posted 09-12-2012 10:00 PM Coyote has acknowledged this reply

  
Prev1
2
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2018