Should Adventists be environmentalists?

[Twilight]

Definition of environmentalist:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmentalism

"Environmentalism is a broad philosophy and social movement regarding concerns for environmental conservation and improvement of the state of the environment."

Over to you...

[Woody]

define "environmentalists".

[Twilight]

Good point, I have revised that Woody. :-)

[Woody]

I appreciate you revising it Mark.

I would love to hear from you what type of environmentalist you are wishing to discuss. But in your own words. NOt the words of others.

As a Christian ... I am concerned about the environment. Most certainly. But in the label of the world ... I would not consider myself attached to the extreme label of "environmentalist".

So, please explain in your own words what you mean by this label.

[teresaq]

Rev 11:18 last phrase should answer this.

i happened to watch the history channel on our infrastructure...after watching it i had to believe we have an awesome God Who is not allowing us to reap the full effects of our actions-yet...

and gives new understanding as to the absolute devastation that will come on us...

something has to pay for the restructuring but we dont want any more taxes....so we will reap what we have sown.

[there buster]

Quote:

Rev 11:18 last phrase should answer this

I suppose it could be, if it had anything to do with environmentalism. In fact "the earth" is used in a quite specific way throughout Revelation, and what we call environmentalism was not a concept familiar to the prophet or his audience.

[teresaq]

then we disagree...i remember God instructing the israelites to let the ground lie fallow one year out of 7...

[Twilight]

What of Adam and Eve.

Where they not supposed to tend the garden?

[there buster]

Quote:

then we disagree...i remember God instructing the israelites to let the ground lie fallow one year out of 7...

I remember that, too. Except it isn't in Revelation. . . and the Israelites did not have an understanding of ecology. They understood that as a requirement of their Divine Ruler. Seeing that as 'environmentalism' is injecting a 21st century idea into a text from 1400 BC. Not good hermeneutics.

[Woody]

I have no doubt that environmentalist have a good heart. But many times their "solutions" only make matters worse.

Also ... often times they have an 'agenda' against certain causes and this means more to them than the actual 'environment'.

[there buster]

Yes, Adam and Eve were required to tend the garden. An indication that the environmentalist idea of wilderness=good is not biblical. Even in a perfect world, nature needed to be molded by human effort, not simply left to do its own thing.

In fact there is a parallel between Adam's incompleteness without Eve, and the Earth's incompleteness with a "man to work the ground." (Gen 2:5)

[Stan]

Of course we need to look after this planet. But how hi should our focus be.

I remember being in the part it Yugoslavia, on about 92 or 94. The slaughter has begun, the international community did nothing until the old city of Dravonivik <<spelling>> began to get bombed, then they stepped in "you must stop! Those historical artifacts are priceless and not replaceable" was the holler that went around the world.

[Woody]

good points there buster

There are areas in the West that Clinton put a fence around and would not allow any human presence or footsteps.

This is the extremist environmentalism that I am referring to.

[Woody]

It wasn't long ago that the environmentalists insisted that we use plastic instead of paper. I'm not sure where they are at now on the issue. But, it goes back and forth and is not based on science.

[Twilight]

TB, that is a good point about the cultivation part, but do you think the whole earth had to be cultivated or just the garden?

Mark :-)

[teresaq]

Quote:

then we disagree...i remember God instructing the israelites to let the ground lie fallow one year out of 7...

I remember that, too. Except it isn't in Revelation. . . and the Israelites did not have an understanding of ecology. They understood that as a requirement of their Divine Ruler. Seeing that as 'environmentalism' is injecting a 21st century idea into a text from 1400 BC. Not good hermeneutics.

you seem to be missing my point, for some reason...

i didnt say it was in revelation...

i dont know that the israelites didnt have an understanding of what we now call "ecology"....

my point is that God, Who gave direct orders, if You will, to the israelites and also gave the vision to john, an israelite, knew all about ecology.

can environmentalism have negative as well as positive aspects? i have no doubt...but if we are so smart, then it seems we should be foremost in presenting the "right" ecological ideas...

can anyone come into agreement as to what those would be? lol

[olger]

Due to the rigorous religious heartbeat of environmentalism, to be one may ultimately bring you into direct collision with true Religion.

[phkrause]

Due to the rigorous religious heartbeat of environmentalism, to be one may ultimately bring you into direct collision with true Religion.

Not sure Olger I agree with that. I do believe that God has asked us to take care of his Planet, which I do believe we are not doing a very good job of.

[Dr. Shane]

Well, I feel like a better Adventist when I act green. Of course, many environmentalists worship nature instead of God - they are also vegetarians. I wish our churches would remodel and become green churches. I think we could get some good publicity out of that and become more relevant to the community.

[there buster]

Quote:

you seem to be missing my point, for some reason...

I'm not missing it. It's just that the evidence you adduce to support your point is faulty.

You used an OT passage about land Sabbaths to bolster a passage in Revelation which has nothing to do with ecology. 1+ 'won' does not equal 2.

Quote:

i dont know that the israelites didnt have an understanding of what we now call "ecology"....

What you "don't know" does not constitute support for your point. Their lack of a concept of what we now call ecology is obvious from the OT texts.

Quote:

my point is that God, Who gave direct orders, if You will, to the israelites and also gave the vision to john, an israelite, knew all about ecology.

What God knows is not at issue. Whether He intended, and whether the recipients understood, the directions He gave as you interpret them is. John the Revelator did not understand 11:8 to be about "creation care." The use of the phrase "the earth" in Revelation is quite different.

And the Israelites did not understand the Land Sabbaths to be about "creation care." They understood them to be about rendering an offering to their divine Lord.

To take these verses and turn them into support for contemporary environmentalism is egregious proof-texting.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

1+ 'won' does not equal 2.

[there buster]

Quote:

do you think the whole earth had to be cultivated or just the garden?

Ellen White says the Garden was a model of what God wanted the entire Earth to be. It makes sense that, as their children grew, they would move out and make gardens of more and more of the Earth.

There is textual support for such a view, but not proof.

The cultivation part is in Gen. 2, where Adam also names the animals. The parallels between Gen 1 and 2 indicate strongly that as God turned the chaos of the world 'without form' in ordered cosmos, Adam (& Eve; in Gen. 1&2 they are a single unit: "male and female created He them") is to order the earth. Adam displays dominion by naming the animals-- in the ancient world, to name something was to control it, thus the prohibition of uttering God's name-- and by ordering the wild earth into a well-kept garden.

[phkrause]

Quote:

do you think the whole earth had to be cultivated or just the garden?

Ellen White says the Garden was a model of what God wanted the entire Earth to be. It makes sense that, as their children grew, they would move out and make gardens of more and more of the Earth.

There is textual support for such a view, but not proof.

The cultivation part is in Gen. 2, where Adam also names the animals. The parallels between Gen 1 and 2 indicate strongly that as God turned the chaos of the world 'without form' in ordered cosmos, Adam (& Eve; in Gen. 1&2 they are a single unit: "male and female created He them") is to order the earth. Adam displays dominion by naming the animals-- in the ancient world, to name something was to control it, thus the prohibition of uttering God's name-- and by ordering the wild earth into a well-kept garden.

Good points there buster.

[Dr. Rich]

Great post Olger, this world will not last another ten years anyway, so we might as well use it up as fast as we can. Oh, perhaps you did not hear the University of Colorado Math Proffessor on youtube (the best I have ever heard) talk about the rule of 70 and has has proof that there will be too many people, not enough land, clean water, food, oil, coal, and shelter to handle everyone within the next 10 to 20 years.

Answer this is you don't understand: If you were sitting in the top seats of the Rose Bowl and it was sealed from leaking, and I told you I would drop one drop of water from an eye dropper every minute, but would also double the amount, at what time in weeks, days hours, minutes would you fear you would drown?

This just might be the same rule God used for this world and if He did, then it is time to 'fear drowing".

[Bravus]

In a similar vein there are some videos around on the web called 'The Crash Course' that address expontential growth (like the fact that world population was 1 billion a century ago and is rapdily heading for 7 billion now). No doubt there will be howls about 'malthusianism' from some quarters... but it does bear thinking about.