"Green" Bible pisses off evangelicals (what doesn't?)

[Brent]

I have no problem with the fact it is made out of recycled material, that is great IMO. I do have a problem with them putting certain texts in green to put focus on the environmental scriptures. That isn't the focus of the bible. The only texts that should be in a different color are the words of Christ, and they already do that in the bible with red text. That is the focus of the bible, and by putting the green text in there you are putting focus on something that isn't what the bible is about.

I'm all for taking care of the world we live in, but making those texts in the bible green is just ridiculous. I wouldn't purchase a bible like that, I have no need for it, my NIV version works just fine and says what it needs to say straight up, if I want to look for environmental wisdom in the bible, I can already do that.

Someone in this thread said it the best, the focus should be on the creator, not the creation.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

The Environment Movement is a nutty religion in and of itself.

So is evangelical Christianity. So is American political conservatism. So is Trek fandom.

So?

I hope that this isn't some lame attempt ...to paint Christians in an ugly light.

Enough sects manage that often enough by their own conduct and teachings to obviate the need for anyone to misrepresent them.

 

[FordSVT]

Where I would have a problem - and I suspect most actual evangelicals would as well - is if it's created to support a personal agenda other than Biblical teaching.

Who decides what is "merely pure Biblical teaching" and what isn't? How are crusades against homosexuality, for instance, anything but someone's personal agenda? There are a few cryptic references in the Bible to homosexual behaviour and yet some people seem to have made a mission out of using the Bible to promote that particular agenda on a gigantic scale. Better environmentalism than that, IMO.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Who decides what is "merely pure Biblical teaching" and what isn't? How are crusades against homosexuality, for instance, anything but someone's personal agenda? There are a few cryptic references in the Bible to homosexual behaviour and yet some people seem to have made a mission out of using the Bible to promote that particular agenda on a gigantic scale. Better environmentalism than that, IMO.

All good points.

"Biblical teaching" as some sort of objective set of lessons or values is chimerical. You can find an enormous range of beliefs within Christianity, and of course deep divisions between different groups who claim to have the right definition of it all.

Something that one evangelical will consider to be "agenda driven" and a deviation from "true scripture" will be pretty self-evidently right to someone else reading the Bible.

 

[shapeshifter]

I think color coding of the entire Bible, placing things throughout it which deal with simulate subjects could be a helpful aid it understanding it. I just don't think we have enough time left for it to matter.

I don't understand why God would be concerned with an environment He plans to destroy with fire.

While commonly believed, this concept is not what the Bible teaches.

What of all that language specifically speaking of the End Times? The Destruction of this universe and the Creation of a New one?

You believe it is all hyperbole or symbolic, that when Christ said "It is finished" on the cross that indicated the "Healing" of mankind was completed and Everything had been restored to the state of things prior to A&Es fall? That Everything is Now as it Should be and Will continue on for all Eternity? (capital letters used as italics)

 

[Neroon]

Who decides what is "merely pure Biblical teaching" and what isn't? How are crusades against homosexuality, for instance, anything but someone's personal agenda? There are a few cryptic references in the Bible to homosexual behaviour and yet some people seem to have made a mission out of using the Bible to promote that particular agenda on a gigantic scale. Better environmentalism than that, IMO.

It's true that there are many instances of people taking Bib lical text and twisting it for their own aims, their own agendas. It's an unfortunate characteristic of humans from all political stripes. I'm not here to debate those specific systems, because that's not exactly the focus of this thread or this forum. My point is what tends to upset the more evangelical people is the use of the Bible for something that is arguably not based in it. Both liberals and conservatives, Christian and non, are guilty of the same tactic.

I can't agree with it in any instance.

 

[Ghel]

The Environment Movement is a nutty religion in and of itself.

How so?

Not that I feel this way myself, but what is religion but a codified form of belief. In a very real sense, we all have our own "religion" or "mythologies" because our lives are full of beliefs for which we have little or no substantive supporting evidence.

While "scientists" whom most of us cannot name and whose studies we cannot cite tell us that humanity is destroying our world with various toxins, most average people have little evidence to support this. In spite of this lack of personal knowledge, because we believe that someone else's research points to global warming, we happily pay extra money to use fabric shopping bags, buy hybrid vehicles, and alter our lives to reduce our "carbon footprint."

While I believe that all of these changes are good and I live my life in as "green" a manner as possible, I am also aware that since I have never done any environmental studies, I do not truly "know" whether the green movement is really important or merely popular claptrap.

 

[Vance]

I went to the site that at the link that you provided. Where is your evidence that this Bible displeases evangelical Christians? I don't see any. I hope that this isn't some lame attempt by a naive and hateful secular humanist to paint Christians in an ugly light.

Actually, while I certainly don't mind the idea of priting Bibles on recycled paper, I certainly think it's grossly inappropriate for the title of this thread to be so vile and bigotted. I don't understand how it was allowed in the first place, as it's certainly troll-bait.

 

[Good]

I hope that this isn't some lame attempt by a naive and hateful secular humanist to paint Christians in an ugly light.

:: rolls eyes :: Wow, I know we secular humanists are evil by nature, but usually I think of naive and hateful as two opposite states.

 

[TerriO]

We've gotten way off the mark here, and way out of Sci-Tech territory.

I'm going to ship this off to Misc and see if it doesn't fare better there.

 

[RoJoHen]

The Environment Movement is a nutty religion in and of itself.

How so?

I'm pretty sure they worship Sea Kittens.

 

[Lightinspire]

I went to the site that at the link that you provided. Where is your evidence that this Bible displeases evangelical Christians? I don't see any. I hope that this isn't some lame attempt by a naive and hateful secular humanist to paint Christians in an ugly light.

Which is very prevalent on this board!! They will jump at the chance to paint Christians in bad light..

 

[Lightinspire]

The Environment Movement is a nutty religion in and of itself.

How so?

Not that I feel this way myself, but what is religion but a codified form of belief. In a very real sense, we all have our own "religion" or "mythologies" because our lives are full of beliefs for which we have little or no substantive supporting evidence.

While "scientists" whom most of us cannot name and whose studies we cannot cite tell us that humanity is destroying our world with various toxins, most average people have little evidence to support this. In spite of this lack of personal knowledge, because we believe that someone else's research points to global warming, we happily pay extra money to use fabric shopping bags, buy hybrid vehicles, and alter our lives to reduce our "carbon footprint."

While I believe that all of these changes are good and I live my life in as "green" a manner as possible, I am also aware that since I have never done any environmental studies, I do not truly "know" whether the green movement is really important or merely popular claptrap.

While 30,000 scientists (including the ones at NASA and NOAH) say that there is no global warming, it is just a cycle..when the fact is, the ice is back at the poles at 1979 levels but the liberal news media will not tell us that.

 

[CaptainHawk1]

I went to the site that at the link that you provided. Where is your evidence that this Bible displeases evangelical Christians? I don't see any. I hope that this isn't some lame attempt by a naive and hateful secular humanist to paint Christians in an ugly light.

Which is very prevalent on this board!! They will jump at the chance to paint Christians in bad light..

Bullshit.

It's not prevalent...

It's the theme of this board.

-Shawn

 

[TheLonelySquire]

WHOA... my first post ever!

I would probably consider myself an evangelical (even though I'm afraid the general American meaning of the word isn't the same as mine) and I think that a green Bible has both benefits and drawbacks.

+
* How awsomely cool is it not to have a Bible made out of recyclled materal!

* Christians (and the world as a whole) needs to pay more focus to the environment and I'm totaly convinced that God wants us to and that the Bible is telling us that (and it has been telling us that for quite a while longer than the environment momement has

-
* 90%+ of the people who buys this book probably allready owns a Bible and 99% of the peoply buying it can problably find a Bible for free online or at a public library instead.
That means that most of the people buying it actually don't really need it and it and the book becomes just another part of our way of buying things we don't really need just because we enjoy owning stuff (and that is kinda against the "green message").

* I don't agree with the "evangelicals" in that the environmental aspect takes away God's message (I believe it is a part of the message).
But I feel a little bit worried when the Word of God is manipulated (in this case the coloured ink making the reader focusing on specific passages) to prove a certain point (weather of not it is a good point or not).
I don't believe that the environmental message in the Bible needs either green ink or a special version of the Bible to be obvious.
I mean... what if the Green Bible is followed by the "War Bible", "Gaybashing Bible" and "Death Penalty Bible"... I guess you get my point...
The Message stands well for itself.


So... the final question...
Will I buy the Green Bible myself?
I must admit that I feel a bit tempted... it's a very cool concept and it would be a hit among my friends (and they are also evangelicals).
But I allready own a few Bibles to I don't think I would have much use for it other that showing it of and as I said... buting stuff just to own them is not the way of God, nor the way of the environmentalists.

Maybe as a gift to someone who doesn't own a Bible yet and who actually would read it


Looking forward to your further thoughts!

Jakob, Sweden

Welcome to the forum, Jakob. And God Bless.

TLS

 

[Captain X]

*still has "Good News Bible" from his first communion*

*shrugs* Who cares? I see a lot of emphasis on environmentalism lately, but to be completely honest this is just another nutty "green" thing to me.