This one goes out to indigenous people all over the world.

lyrics:

We don’t serve your country
don’t serve your king
Know your custom don’t speak your tongue
White man came took everyone

We don’t serve your country
We don’t serve your king
White man listen to the songs we sing
White man came took everything

We carry in our hearts the true country
And that cannot be stolen
We follow in the steps of our ancestry
And that cannot be broken

We don’t serve your country
We don’t serve your king
Know your custom don’t speak your tongue
White man came took everyone

We don’t need protection
don’t need your hand
just keep your promise on where we stand
We will listen- we’ll understand

We carry in our hearts the true country
And that cannot be stolen
We follow in the steps of our ancestry
And that cannot be broken
We carry in our hearts the true country
And that cannot be stolen
We follow in the steps of our ancestry
And that cannot be broken

Mining companies, pastoral companies
Uranium companies
Collected companies
Got more right than people
Got more say than people

Forty thousand years can make a difference to the state of things
The dead heart lives here

Here is one of the most powerful songs I’ve heard in a while. Hope it gives you a blessing. It made me shed tears.

Lyrics:

I then shall live
as one whose been forgiven
I’ll walk with with joy
to know my debts are paid
I know my name is clear before my Father
I am His child and I am nolt afraid
so greatly pardoned, I’ll forgive my brother
the law of love, I gladly will obey
I then shall live
as one whose learned compassion
I ‘ve been so loved, that I’ll risk loving too
I know how fear builds walls instead of bridges
I’ll dare to see another’s point of view
and when relationships demand commitment
then, I’ll be there to care and follow through
Your Kingdom come around and through and in me
Your power and glory let them shine through me
Your hallowed Name, O, may I bear with honor
and may your living Kingdom come, in me
the Bread of Life, O, may I share with others
and may You feed the hungry world through me
Amen!!!!

There are many views and opinions concerning the environment representing a wide range of world views. With this essay I intend to present a biblical view of the environment including its origin, present state, and future destiny.

Origin

“In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth” (Gen. 1:1). The Bible tells us that God existed before the universe and that He created it. For more details on the creation account read chapters 1 and 2 of Genesis. Scientific Creationism also reveals intelligent design in the creation, thus testifying of an intelligent Creator.1

The purpose of creation is to worship and bring glory to God. “The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork” (Ps. 19:1). See also Ps. 148 and Is. 40:25,26. It also testifies of God’s qualities. “For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse” (Rom. 1:20).

Man is made in God’s image. “And God said, Let us make man in our image” (Gen. 1:26). (Note: The plural pronoun testifies of the Trinity.) While every created thing has value in itself, man alone is created in the image of God. This contradicts the Eastern monism philosophy which says all is one.2 William B. Badke, author of Project Earth,3 says that the earliest responsibility of man and the only mandate given him concerning interaction with the earth is found in Gen. 2:15 which says, “The LORD God placed the man in the Garden of Eden as its gardener, to tend and care for it” (The Living Bible). The Hebrew word for tend can also mean “to serve” and the word for care may be translated “to keep safe, preserve, protect.” This mandate has never been rescinded.

God gave Adam and Eve dominion in the earth (Gen. 1:28). This means that the human race is to be in charge of the stewardship of the earth and to nurture it, not dominate and exploit it for selfish motives.

“Historian Lynn White was correct in placing some blame for environmental decay on Christianity. But it is a misunderstanding of the Bible, not God’s word itself, that is at fault here,”4 says Tom Sider, professor of theology and culture, Eastern Baptist Theological Seminary, and president of Evangelicals for Social Action. British author Catherine von Ruhland says, “Christianity is often criticised as being the reason for much of the damage that has occurred on the planet. But we should make clear to the critics that it is not our faith, but a combination of scientific theory and industrial progress among unbelievers and our own wrong understanding of God’s Word that has brought about destruction.”5

Present State

The event that kicked off our present state, both physically and spiritually, is the fall of man. Along with the mandate of stewardship of the Garden, God told Adam and Eve that they had free access to anything in the Garden except the fruit of one tree which would bring physical and spiritual death (Gen. 2:16,17). This was simply a test of man’s love and obedience to his Creator. God wanted a relationship based on choice and without the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil man would not have had any choice to please or displease God. Needless to say man ate the forbidden fruit and here we are today.

Sin is the breaking of God’s commandment and it is sin that is the major environmental threat. Physical death and the ground being cursed are just two results of the fall (Gen. 3:17-19). By choosing to disobey our Creator and live in sin the Bible says that the land and animals mourn (Hos. 4:1-3). Sin has such a violent effect on the environment that the Bible says the land will vomit out the sinning inhabitants (Lev. 18:25). Sin is what motivates the destruction of the environment for financial gain (1 Tim. 6:10).

But God promises to heal the land if we will turn from our wicked ways (2 Chr. 7:14). (Understand that there will not be complete restoration until God recreates the earth, 1 Pet. 3:13 and Rev. 21:1). By turning to God and being filled with His Spirit we can have the sensitivity to people and the environment that is necessary (Rom. 8). Indeed, sensitivity to others will affect our treatment of the environment. For example, if we know that there are people who live downstream from us and depend on a river we use, we should be careful to not dump pollution into the river so they can have water that they can use. By our sensitivity to the people who live downstream from us, we will change our treatment of the river we use to do what we can to provide safe and clean water for others who depend upon the same river. Matthew 25 shows that insensitivity to people is also insensitivity to God and will bring His judgement.

Tony Campolo also says that since nature worships God, (Ps. 148) ecological destruction interferes with and silences the worship of God.6 He calls this blasphemy.

Ron Sider says, “The first purpose of the nonhuman creation is to glorify God not to serve us.”4 The Bible says, “The earth is the Lord’s” (Ps. 24:1). We must realize our role in creation is to worship God and to be stewards of the earth. A steward is a caretaker, not an owner.

Unlike monism, which says all is one, a biblical view, while agreeing that in ecology all things are interconnected, says in the spiritual realm there are two orders — the regenerated and the fallen. The fall that Adam and Eve experienced has carried on over to every human since (Rom. 3:10, 23). But there is hope of regeneration. “For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive” (1 Cor. 15:22).

God is deeply concerned with His creation and this is shown in many passages of Scripture. In Gen. 9:9,10 God made a covenant with all of creation not to destroy it with a flood ever again and He set the rainbow in the cloud to be a token of that covenant. In Job 39:1,2 God shows that He is with the wild animals when they give birth. Matt. 6:25-30 shows that God feeds the birds and clothes the fields. It is by His power that creation holds together or consists as Col. 1:16, 17 points out. Because God is so intimately concerned with His creation He promises to restore it.

Future Destiny

“Everything that Christianity hopes for is wrapped up with the ultimate fate of the earth,” says Glenn Paauw, author of The Garden of God.7 The Bible teaches that salvation is for all of creation, not just humans (Is. 11, Ez. 47). This world will be burned up with fire (2 Pet. 3) and God will create a new heaven and a new earth (Rev. 21:1, Is. 65:17). True physical peace will reign (Hos. 2:18) and God will live with His people on the Earth (Rev. 21:3). Until that day Christians continue to pray, “Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven” (Matt. 6:10).

Some may say, “If the world will be destroyed by fire and recreated why should we be concerned about the environment?” Well let me sum up some reasons given thus far and introduce some new ones: 1) Destruction of the environment is blasphemy against God; 2) Stewardship is a responsibility; 3) Other people suffer because of the destruction of the environment; 4) Animals suffer; 5) Creation itself suffers (Rom. 8:19-21); 6) The danger is massive and urgent; 7) Common sense tells us to properly manage our resources to maintain a sustainable yield; and I would like to leave you with an idea from Tony Campolo which may be the most practical reason of all. He says the sooner or later we will all get involved in the environmental movement because sooner or later we will all get hurt because of what we’re doing to the environment.6

——————

1. For information on Scientific Creationism see Institute for Creation Research at http://www.icr.org.

2. For more information on monism see James W. Sire, The Universe Next Door: A Basic World View Catalog, 3d ed. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1997.

3. Badke, William B. (1991). Project Earth: Preserving the World God Created. Portland, Multnomah Press.

4. Sider, Ron J. (1993, June 21). Redeeming the Environmentalists. Christianity Today.

5. von Ruhland, Catharine (1991). Going Green: A Christian Guide. Great Britain, Marshall Pickering.

6. Campolo, Tony (1992). How to Rescue the Earth Without Worshiping Nature. Nashville, Thomas Nelson, Inc.

7. Paauw, Glenn (1992). The Garden of God. Colorado Springs, International Bible Society.

source

LEFT BEHIND:

The Skewed Representation of Religion in Major News Media

It would surprise few people, conservative or progressive, to learn that coverage of the intersection of religion and politics tends to oversimplify both. If this oversimplification occurred to the benefit or detriment of neither side of the political divide, then the weaknesses in coverage of religion would be of only academic interest. But as this study documents, coverage of religion not only overrepresents some voices and underrepresents others, it does so in a way that is consistently advantageous to conservatives.

As in many areas, the decisions journalists make when deciding which voices to include in their stories have serious consequences. What is the picture of religious opinion? Who is a religious leader? Whose views represent important groups of believers? Every time a journalist writes a story, he or she answers these questions by deciding whom to quote and how to characterize their views.

Religion is often depicted in the news media as a politically divisive force, with two sides roughly paralleling the broader political divide: On one side are cultural conservatives who ground their political values in religious beliefs; and on the other side are secular liberals, who have opted out of debates that center on religion-based values. The truth, however is far different: close to 90 percent of Americans today self-identify as religious, while only 22 percent belong to traditionalist sects. Yet in the cultural war depicted by news media as existing across religious lines, centrist and progressive voices are marginalized or absent altogether.

In order to begin to assess how the news media paint the picture of religion in America today, this study measured the extent to which religious leaders, both conservative and progressive, are quoted, mentioned, and interviewed in the news media.

Among the study’s key findings:

• Combining newspapers and television, conservative religious leaders were quoted, mentioned, or interviewed in news stories 2.8 times as often as were progressive religious leaders.
• On television news — the three major television networks, the three major cable news channels, and PBS — conservative religious leaders were quoted, mentioned, or interviewed almost 3.8 times as often as progressive leaders.

• In major newspapers, conservative religious leaders were quoted, mentioned, or interviewed 2.7 times as often as progressive leaders.

Despite the fact most religious Americans are moderate or progressive, in the news media it is overwhelmingly conservative leaders who are presented as the voice of religion. This represents a particularly meaningful distortion since progressive religious leaders tend to focus on different issues and offer an entirely different perspective than their conservative counterparts.

I want to write a response to this e-mail propaganda that I have gotten in my inbox several times in the last 7 years. First read the “Tampa” article and then be sure to read my response to it further down:

Think about this: If you don’t want to forward this for fear of offending someone—–YOU’RE PART OF THE PROBLEM !!!!

Subject: THIS WAS IN A TAMPA NEWSPAPER

Will we still be the Country of choice and still be America if we continue to make the changes forced on us by the people from other countries that came to live in America because it is the Country of Choice??????

Think about it! All we have to say is, when will they do something about MY RIGHTS?

I celebrate Christmas………..but because it isn’t celebrated by everyone…………..we can no longer say Merry Christmas. Now it has to be Season’s Greetings.

It’s not Christmas vacation, it’s Winter Break. Isn’t it amazing how this winter break ALWAYS occurs over the Christmas holiday?

We’ve gone so far the other way, bent over backwards to not offend anyone, that I am now being offended. But it seems that no one has a problem with that. This says it all!

This is an editorial written by an
American citizen, published in a
Tampa, FL Newspaper. He did quite a job; didn’t he? Read on, please!

IMMIGRANTS,
NOT AMERICANS,
MUST ADAPT.
I am tired of this nation worrying about whether we
are offending some individual or their culture. Since the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11,
we have experienced a surge
in patriotism by the majority
of Americans. However…… the dust from the attacks had
barely settled when the “politically correct! ” crowd began complaining about
the possibility that our patriotism was offending others.

I am not against immigration, nor do I hold a grudge against anyone who is seeking a better life by coming to America.
Our population is almost entirely made up of descendants of immigrants.
However, there
are a few things that those
who have recently come to
our country, and apparently some born here, need to understand.
This idea of America being a
multicultural community
has served only to dilute our sovereignty and our national idenitity. As Americans……
we have our own culture, our
own society, our own language and our own lifestyle. This culture has been developed over centuries of struggles, trials, and victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom.

We speak ENGLISH, not Spanish, Portuguese, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other language.
Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society, learn the language!

“In God We Trust” is our national motto. This is not some Christian, right wing, political slogan.. We adopted this motto because Christian men and women…….on Christian principles………….
founded this nation….. and this is clearly documented.
It is certainly appropriate to display it
on the walls of our schools
If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as
your new home………because
God is part of our culture.

If Stars and Stripes offend you, or
you don’t like Uncle Sam, then you
should s eriously consider a move
to another part of this planet.
We
are happy with our culture and have
no desire to change, and we really
don’t care how you did things where
you came from.
This is
OUR COUNTRY,
our land, and our lifestyle.
Our First Amendment gives every citizen the
right to express his opinion and we
will allow you every opportunity to do so!
But once you are done complaining……. whining…… and griping……. about our flag…….
our pledge…… our national motto……..or our
way of life….I highly encourage you to
take advantage of one other Great American Freedom…….

THE RIGHT TO LEAVE.

It is Time for America to Speak up
If you agree — pass this along;
if you don’t agree — delete it - You are in the WRONG Country!

AMEN

I figure if we all keep passing this to our friends (and enemies) it will also, sooner or later
get back to the complainers, lets all try,
please!

Here is my response, I actually wrote this in probably 2003:

Man, I wish that they would have held this philosophy in 1492 or in any of the five centuries of conquest since then- because it has a little ethical merit. Unfortunately however, most of it happens to be in contradiction to human nature and natural order…especially the eurocentric/ ethnocentric approach to reality. It’s never too late to start learning some of the many languages and customs of the First Nations of the “Americas”- like say Iroquoiian, to prove these points by example though! Its the best way to live…by example! Even the social Darwinists know that.
Consider this. In Northern California, there was once over a hundred Native language families. They were often as different as Russian is from Hebrew. Yet, these autonomous communities of people were able to relatively peacefully coexist in co-operative networks for millenia …. that is until immigrants from another worldview came along and sought to homogenize everything into their own way of thinking. Natural law does not require homogeneity. In fact natural law is dependant on networks of diversity to operate in any kind of balance at all. Nature organizes itself into ecosystems of interdependance. Although I agree that when people migrate to new territory they should look for ways to integrate into the existing order out of ethical courtesy and pragmatic economics- it must be admitted that infinite diversity in infinite combinations does not lend itself easily to homogeneity. That is the reailty we must acknowledge and begin to work with. Did you know that wherever in the world you find the most diversity of human communities and human languages- there you also find the most ecological balance, the most species of surviving plants and animals and the most harmony among men? When death and destruction comes to these areas- it comes not because of the networks of diversity, but at the heels of the land and resource speculators and the colonial empire builders… those who seek to dominate, control and exploit…and assimilate. Think about it. Its not natural and human diversity that is the enemy. Its selfishness in the heart of Man plain and simple. Its the “Golden Rule” that we should be fighting for. If this had been observed from the inception of the “United States”, we would not have some of these social problems we have now and you would not be hearing me challenge the now existing order.
Good on ya!

In response to these “words of wisdom” by Teddy Roosevelt;

(”But this is predicated upon the man’s becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American…There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag, and this excludes the red flag, which symbolizes all wars against liberty and civilization, just as much as it excludes any foreign flag of a nation to which we are hostile…We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language…and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.”)

S.S. says:

In one very small area of what is now called “Northern California” there once existed at least 110 different “language families”. These “families” were as different and distinct as Italian is from Vietnamese in nearly every case. Yet these diverse groups found a way to co-exist in relative peace and harmony for thousands, if not tens of thousands of years. This is just one example from Native America that disproves the thesis that a collective continental grouping of people must homogenize language and culture to survive or function smoothly. In fact, this xenophobic drive for homogenization only leads to “genocide of the mind” (if not actual genocides of human groups) and a culture that devours everything in its path. The natural state of God’s good, nurturing creation is in fact one of diversity…infinite diversity in infinite combinations…not of homogenization, mechanization and industrialization.

Thank You for This Earth

1 Corinthians 2:14-15

14 The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned. 15 The spiritual man makes judgments about all things, but he himself is not subject to any man’s judgment.

That means we are supposed to discern of all things- hold to that which is good and true and beautiful and helpful and throw out the rest. On that note… here is useful information:

Native American Religious and Cultural Freedom: an Introductory Essay (2005)
© Michael D. McNally

Full article found HERE.

Excerpt:

In all their diversity, people from different Native nations hasten to point out that their respective languages include no word for “religion”, and maintain an emphatic distinction between ways of life in which economy, politics, medicine, art, agriculture, etc., are ideally integrated into a spiritually-informed whole. As Native communities try to continue their traditions in the context of a modern American society that conceives of these as discrete segments of human thought and activity, it has not been easy for Native communities to accomplish this kind of integration. Nor has it been easy to to persuade others of, for example, the spiritual importance of what could be construed as an economic activity, such as fishing or whaling.

I believe that Christianity is supposed to be a holistic spiritual relationship rather than a religion per se.

Read this article and think…no skimming! LOL:

Excerpt:

This article explores how the concepts of ecology are presented and utilized in the evangelical Protestant response to the ecological crisis. It finds that there are seven basic themes in the literature: (1) etymological discussions; (2) the concepts of interdependence and balance; (3) cycles and energy flow; (4) food chain/food web/ecological pyramid; (5) carrying capacity; (6) the idea that humans are the disrupters of “nature’s” balance; and (7) the contrary idea that humans are a part of the ecosystem. In light of these themes, I make several observations. One is that the summarized findings of ecology becomes the latest version of natural theology: God’s will is for each ecosystem to be a climax ecosystem which never declines. If this is the case, then western agriculture, industry, and the use of much technology will have to be severely curtailed–a situation unacceptable to most evangelical Protestants.

Many scholars have argued that western culture, infused with a Christian understanding of the world, provided a nurturing environment for the development of science. The belief in a purposeful God, the argument goes, who gave order and coherence to the universe allowed scientists to assume that they could discover such order, such “laws.” God made a world which was consistent and real, and therefore predictable. The discipline of ecology has also benefited from Christian assumptions embedded in western culture. By the time ecology began to develop as a scientific discipline, however, these assumptions had become “secularized,” or stripped of their God-talk. In other words, early ecologists did not have to believe in a Christian God to assume that the world was orderly, consistent, real, and predictable. These beliefs had become cultural norms taken for granted by everyone in the West; they could be understood by an ecologist as simply similarities between Christianity and science, rather than shared beliefs which have their “genesis” in Christian doctrine.

Not surprisingly, it is these assumptions that evangelical Protestants emphasize when informing their audience about the concept of ecology.¹ Furthermore, probably in part because of these shared assumptions, the languages of ecology and theology are mixed together without any serious discussion about what the potential differences could be–not so much a synthesis as a bricolage. This article is an attempt to describe and analyze the concept of ecology contained in the evangelical Protestant response to the ecological crisis, and to raise questions about its use.
____________________________________________________________________________

I have a book entitled “Project Earth: Preserving the World God Created” ,

For more on these vital topics also visit these posts:

The Misuse of “Radah” (dominion)

A Biblical View of the Environment

A Christian View of the Environment

The Meaning of Genesis

Why Are We Here?

Quantum Freewill, the Breath and Spirit of God…

Doing Lunch With The Almighty

Poverty, Pollution and Environmental Racism

Eleven Inherent rules of Corporate Behavior

Is God Green?

Thank You For This Earth

Indigenous Mind

I think that Mr. Eldridge (John Eldrige author of Wild At Heart and others) made use of this type of example.

It is the Creator, by His Holy Spirit, unexpectedly reaching into my soul and plucking the “Holy Chord” and as it resonates through my heart, mind and soul I will feel the urge to fall on my knees and just cry, but, not a sad cry.

This happens just as Eldridge describes it, unexpectedly; maybe a sunrise that seems to turn some surreal and unknown color that could not be duplicated on any artist’s palate no matter how many times that he tried , or sometimes when we sing a song in church that touches at the love of God and the harmony of the body all combine in a glorious crescendo.

This feeling is one of those things that I try to choke down and suffocate, if I am not alone. I sometimes think that I should just let go; that maybe I’m quenching the Holy Spirit.
DSM