Re: [asa] Falwell on Global Warming

Sigh... Why do evangelicals so often make exactly the mistake St
Augustine warned us against. The evidence supporting global warming
is quite strong, and remember how people objected to the ozone hole
argument? And yet some seem willing to repeat history. As a Christian
and a scientists I am saddened to hear how some are so quick to
reject the good science behind the global warming science.

Augustine:

Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the
heavens, and the other elements of this world, about the motion and
orbit of the stars and even their size and relative positions, about
the predictable eclipses of the sun and moon, the cycles of the years
and the seasons, about the kinds of animals, shrubs, stones, and so
forth, and this knowledge he hold to as being certain from reason and
experience. Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an
infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy
Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all
means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show
up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn. The shame is
not so much that an ignorant individual is derided, but that people
outside the household of faith think our sacred writers held such
opinions, and, to the great loss of those for whose salvation we
toil, the writers of our Scripture are criticized and rejected as
unlearned men. If they find a Christian mistaken in a field which
they themselves know well and hear him maintaining his foolish
opinions about our books, how are they going to believe those books
in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of
eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven, when they think their pages
are full of falsehoods and on facts which they themselves have learnt
from experience and the light of reason? Reckless and incompetent
expounders of Holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their
wiser brethren when they are caught in one of their mischievous false
opinions and are taken to task by those who are not bound by the
authority of our sacred books. For then, to defend their utterly
foolish and obviously untrue statements, they will try to call upon
Holy Scripture for proof and even recite from memory many passages
which they think support their position, although they understand
neither what they say nor the things about which they make assertion.
[1 Timothy 1.7]

On Nov 20, 2006, at 2:04 PM, Carol or John Burgeson wrote:

> Here is an email today from Jerry.
>
> Burgy
>
> Date: November 20, 2006
> From: Moral Majority and Liberty Alliance
> By: Jerry Falwell
>
> Evangelicals and Global Warming
>
> There is a developing cultural divide occurring within the evangelical
> community over an unlikely subject: global warming.
>
> On one side, we have Southern Baptist-in-name-only Al Gore touting the
> potential ruin of the planet in his film “An Inconvenient Truth.”
> Joining
> with him, somewhat surprisingly, has been the upstart Evangelical
> Climate
> Initiative (ECI), which has called for sweeping reform to combat
> global
> warming in what it terms a Bible-based response to the issue.
>
> Curiously, the ECI, which includes 86 prominent church leaders, has
> linked with abortion-on-demand and population control organizations
> that
> are touting global warming as genuine science.
>
> The ECI’s decision to join the global warming wars compelled two
> conservative evangelical think tanks — the Institute on Religion &
> Democracy and the Action Institute for the Study of Religion &
> Liberty —
> to suggest the ECI has been “exploited” by the abortion-rights
> community.
> They note that this strange union could actually “give anti-Christian
> ideologies unmerited moral and theological cover.”
>
> Indeed, it could.
>
> On the other hand, a position from which I am writing, there are those
> who believe that, while the earth appears to have slightly warmed in
> recent years, there is legitimate question as to whether this has been
> caused by human activity or by natural cycles.
>
> So, a group of evangelicals has united to counter the efforts of the
> ECI.
> This group, the Interfaith Stewardship Alliance (ISA), is a
> gathering of
> scholars and pastors (yes, they can coexist) who believe that
> “evangelicals should be wary of the politicization and bad science of
> global warming alarmism.”
>
> The problem is that when evangelicals jump on board with liberal
> groups
> that are advancing climate alarmism, the so-called major media is
> there
> to trumpet their action. As such, when the Interfaith Stewardship
> Alliance’s released its “Call to Truth, Prudence and Protection of the
> Poor,” which contains a “detailed biblical and scientific response to
> the
> much-heralded Evangelical Climate Initiative,” it was virtually
> ignored
> by the media.
>
> Another frequently ignored element in the global warming debate is the
> fact that so-called solutions to the problem will damage the American
> economy.
>
> Bill Saunders, director of the Family Research Council’s Center for
> Human
> Life and Bioethics and Human Rights Council, recently wrote: “If the
> effects of global warming are real and, in the future, humans face
> hotter
> summers and higher sea levels, the solution is not restricting energy
> access and limiting economic growth. That is quite unlikely to
> solve the
> problem. It is certain to lead to economic recession in developed
> countries, invariably keeping undeveloped countries in poverty as
> their
> growth is dependent on the strength of developed nations.”
>
> So we must address any real climate changes with legitimate solutions
> that do not hinder economic development in our nation. The world will
> certainly suffer if America is monetarily punished.
>
> Nevertheless, the United Nations is touting global warming as an
> issue as
> problematic as terrorism.
>
> This week, Sen. James Inhofe dismissed a U.N. meeting on climate
> change
> as “a brainwashing session,” proclaiming that "The idea that the
> science
> (on global warming) is settled is altogether wrong.”
>
> He’ll certainly be pilloried by those who believe we should not
> question
> the facts of global warming.
>
> I thank God that we have reasonable men like Sen. Inhofe (R-Okla.) who
> are willing to take a stand.
>
> Finally, I think it’s interesting that, according to the NOAA National
> Climatic Data Center, the last two months in the continental U.S. have
> been cooler than average.
>
> The organization reported: “The combination of a cooler-than-average
> September and October dropped the year-to-date national temperature
> from
> record warmest to third warmest for the January through October 2006
> period. The record warmest January through October occurred in 1934.”
>
> I imagine if the scientists of 1934 had the technology we enjoy today,
> they would have been predicting global warming in their era, as well.
> The
> only problem would have been that their fellow scientists in the 1970s
> would be predicting a massive global freeze in the near future. Of
> course, that didn’t happen.
>
> In other words, cooler heads must prevail in this global warming
> debate,
> especially in the evangelical community.
>
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Nov 22 14:27:07 2006