• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Climate Change, the Will of God

Faithofchristian

Well-Known Member
One in four Republicans believe climate change is not caused by man but is the will of God.

For a significant number of Americans, the reality, causes and meaning of global warming are seen through the lens of their religious beliefs. Some reject the evidence that humans are causing global warming because they believe God controls the climate. Others believe that global warming is evidence that the world will be ending soon, and that we don’t need to worry about global warming in light of the approaching apocalypse. To assess the level of acceptance of these beliefs among Americans, we surveyed a nationally representative sample of 1,204 American adults in March, 2016.

Global Warming, God and the "End Times" - Yale Program on Climate Change Communication


Hey look, the earth has been around for what Millions if not Billions of years, and how many Climate Change do you suppose the earth has gone thru and the earth is still here.

The earth has been bombarded by Meteorites from outer space and earthquakes and volcanoes and hurricanes, but yet the earth is still here. And you think a climate change will effect the earth in anyway.
This climate change has been an on going thing for the pass 30 to 40 years from the Democratic Party, but still nothing, but only to take People for fools and People's money.
 
Last edited:

Faithofchristian

Well-Known Member
Jesus said we would have the poor with us. Jesus used the illustrative story about a neighborly good Samaritan to show we should all widen out or broaden out in showing love to others in distress on a one-on-one basis.

I find at Psalms 72:12-14 that God will take care of the poor.
That is in God's due time frame of Psalms 72:8 when Jesus will have earthly subjects or citizens under him.
Meaning to me when Jesus' coming 1,000-year governmental rule over Earth begins.
At that millennial time according to Revelation 22:2 there will be healing for earth's nations.
' Healing ' in that No one will No longer be poor during Jesus millennium-long day of governing over Earth.

Any thoughts about Revelation 7:16-17 because we are before God's throne here on Earth ( Earth God's footstool, so to speak )


Yeah, my thought is this, just how exactly do you or anyone else know exactly they will be there standing before the Throne of God.
When in fact many will take the mark, number of the beast and will be case into the lake of fire.
So how does Revelation 20:7-10, fit into Revelation 7:16-17 ?
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
The issue of global warming is real because it is based on real measurements that have been taken for over 200 years now. For quite a while, the only serious question was what is/are the cause(s)? Because of noticeably higher levels of both CO2 and methane gas, which we know with certainty have a heat-retaining effect, plus the research that has shown no other factors appear to be a major cause, the meteorologists overwhelmingly realize that it's human actions that is largely causing it.

The only real push-back is political, especially the fossil-fuel industry and those whom they pay off, and that is mostly done by those on the right of the political spectrum. As the saying goes, "you can have your opinions but not your own facts", all too many are falsifying the facts for political and economic advantage, thus convincing those not familiar with the science on this to blindly follow the right-wing talking-heads.
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Hey look, the earth has been around for what Millions if not Billions of years, and how many Climate Change do you suppose the earth has gone thru and the earth is still here.
Five, in the past half billion years, that killed off at least 50% of species.

Don't confuse the slow, natural variations in climate with the current, rapid, catastrophic change science is warning us about. It's not the normal climate variation the planet's always undergoing that has scientists worried. It's the fact that we seem to be in the early stages of a sixth mass extinction event.
The earth has been bombarded by Meteorites from outer space and earthquakes and volcanoes and hurricanes, but yet the earth is still here. And you think a climate change will effect the earth in anyway.
Why would you think otherwise? Just look at the previous incidents.
Mars is "still here," too, but it no longer resembles the warm, watery world it once was.
And I wouldn't dismiss volcanism or meteor strikes -- they've been causes or contributors in the past events.

Causes aside, though, these events do wreak havoc on the planet's ecology. Recovery to something resembling the previous degree of biodiversity takes tens of millions of years.

This climate change has been an on going thing for the pass 30 to 40 years from the Democratic Party, but still nothing, but only to take People for fools and People's money.
No, it's not a recent, Democratic invention. Thomas Jefferson wrote a warning about climate change in 1787, though he didn't have the hard data to back it up.
Exxon knew about it in the '70s -- and did have backup. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/exxon-knew-about-climate-change-almost-40-years-ago/
As for "still nothing," the evidence is everywhere, and the causes are obvious. Moreover, no-one's into it for the money -- all the money's in climate denial camp.
 

Guy Threepwood

Mighty Pirate
One in four Republicans believe climate change is not caused by man but is the will of God.

For a significant number of Americans, the reality, causes and meaning of global warming are seen through the lens of their religious beliefs. Some reject the evidence that humans are causing global warming because they believe God controls the climate. Others believe that global warming is evidence that the world will be ending soon, and that we don’t need to worry about global warming in light of the approaching apocalypse. To assess the level of acceptance of these beliefs among Americans, we surveyed a nationally representative sample of 1,204 American adults in March, 2016.

Global Warming, God and the "End Times" - Yale Program on Climate Change Communication

Anthropomorphic climate change/ bad weather being caused by bad people... is probably the oldest superstition known to mankind, and there will always be people in power accepting sacrifices to appease Gaia. It can be adopted into pretty much any belief system, including atheism as we see
 

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
Anthropomorphic climate change/ bad weather being caused by bad people... is probably the oldest superstition known to mankind, and there will always be people in power accepting sacrifices to appease Gaia. It can be adopted into pretty much any belief system, including atheism as we see

So you don't believe global warming is caused by the actions of man?
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Anthropomorphic climate change/ bad weather being caused by bad people... is probably the oldest superstition known to mankind, and there will always be people in power accepting sacrifices to appease Gaia. It can be adopted into pretty much any belief system, including atheism as we see
But it's not a superstition. It's founded on hard evidence.
dunno.gif
 

Guy Threepwood

Mighty Pirate
So you don't believe global warming is caused by the actions of man?

It was global warming in the 30's, global cooling when I went to school in the 70's, and we have the catch-all 'climate change' now for things like the record cold we just experienced in Michigan- but I think there are perfectly natural explanations for all of these yes.

There is no statistically significant measurable 'global 'warming going on for starters, we are lucky to live in a notably mild stable period, anything we can do to help delay the next ice age would be great, but a couple extra CO2 molecules in 10000 of air is nowhere near enough I fear
 
Last edited:

Guy Threepwood

Mighty Pirate
But it's not a superstition. It's founded on hard evidence.
dunno.gif

^ not sure if that's meant to be satirical,

But switching scary masks and dances for computer sims does not make the theory any less scientifically illiterate.

If anything the ancient soothsayers examining bird entrails were using a more scientific method to ascertain future weather events.
 

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
It was global warming in the 30's, global cooling when I went to school in the 70's, and we have the catch-all 'climate change' now for things like the record cold we just experienced in Michigan- but I think there are perfectly natural explanations for all of these yes.

There is no statistically significant measurable global 'warming going' on for starters, we are lucky to live in a notably mild stable period, anything we can do to help delay the next ice age would be great, but a couple extra CO2 molecules in 10000 of air is nowhere near enough I fear

Yes, me too. I was there for the global cooling scare.

However I see technology moving past dependence on fossil fuels anyway.

Electric cars, internet, automation. Demand for fossils fuels keeps going down.

Hard to say the drama wasn't necessary. Focus on the environment isn't a bad thing. Would we really be here without it?

Apparently, we don't need the support of the president or republicans to get things done.
 

Guy Threepwood

Mighty Pirate
Yes, me too. I was there for the global cooling scare.

However I see technology moving past dependence on fossil fuels anyway.

Electric cars, internet, automation. Demand for fossils fuels keeps going down.

Hard to say the drama wasn't necessary. Focus on the environment isn't a bad thing. Would we really be here without it?

Apparently, we don't need the support of the president or republicans to get things done.


I've nothing against electric vehicles if they could compete economically, technologically- but they are certainly not a new idea, they are Victorian age-tech

The electric car predates the internal combustion, and it's market share peaked over 100 years ago, before the invention of the combustion engine made them redundant.

Arguably we could say the divide has only grown ever since, which is why 100 years later, EV's still need vast subsidies to eek out a tiny market share.

The only way electric cars will ever outsell, is if internal combustion is effectively banned and the personal automobile is effectively restricted to the wealthy, as it was 100 years ago, and there are some who explicitly want to return to these 'good old days'
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
Yeah, my thought is this, just how exactly do you or anyone else know exactly they will be there standing before the Throne of God.
When in fact many will take the mark, number of the beast and will be case into the lake of fire.
So how does Revelation 20:7-10, fit into Revelation 7:16-17 ?

Thank you for your reply.
What I find according to Jesus is the one who endures to the end is saved (delivered / rescued)- Matthew 24:13.
Since the humble living figurative ' sheep ' of Matthew 25:31-33,37,40 are alive on Earth at this soon coming ' time of separation ' on Earth, then they will be standing on God's 'footstool' (aka Earth - Isaiah 66:1; Matthew 5:35; Acts of the apostles 7:49) before the heavenly Throne of God.

Also, I find the biblical definition of the lake of fire is defined at Revelation 20:13-14 as being the ' second death '.
So, to me the ' second death ' of Revelation 21:8 is from that definition of the lake of fire being 'second death'.

At Revelation 7:13-17 to me is referring in connection to those ' sheep ' of Matthew 25:37 because they are the ones who come through alive or come out of the coming great tribulation of Revelation 7:14.
So, those 'sheep ' are the saved (delivered /rescued) at the end time of Matthew 24:13 ( our time frame ).
They are guided to waters of life with No reason to shed tears any more ( unless tears of joy !) -Isaiah 25:8
They will see the fulfillment of Revelation 22:2 on Earth when Jesus will fulfill God's promise to father Abraham that ALL families of Earth, and ALL nations of Earth will be blessed. Blessed with the benefit of healing for earth's nations.
I enjoy seeing in verse 2 that mankind will once again see the return on Earth of the Genesis ' tree of life ' on Earth for the healing of earth's nations on Earth. To me this healing on Earth is why we are invited to pray the invitation for 'Jesus to come ' according to Revelation 22:20. Come and bring healing blessings to Earth.
Blessings to the point that even ' enemy death ' will be No more on Earth as promised at 1 Corinthians 15:24-26.

The time frame for Revelation 20:7-10 advances to the end of Jesus millennium-long day of governing over Earth.
Those 'sheep' at the earlier time of the great tribulation which climaxes in Armageddon (Psalms 46:9) could still be alive on Earth at the end of the 1,000 years. They, with others, along with those of John 3:13, who have a physical earthly resurrection can gain everlasting life on a beautiful paradisical Earth as originally offered to Adam.

In Revelation 20:10 we find the ' beast ' and the ' false prophet ' are already in the lake ' second death ' ( No resurrection for them ), then temporarily free-from-the abyss Satan joins them in ' second death ' - Revelation 21:8.
Or, as Hebrews 2:14 B lets us know Jesus destroys Satan, so ' second death ' if a fitting term for: destruction.
Destruction as Psalms 92:7 says the wicked will be destroyed forever or annihilated.
So, the symbolic torment for the figurative goats, beast, false prophet and Satan is their being held in destruction forever.
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
Yes, me too. I was there for the global cooling scare.
However I see technology moving past dependence on fossil fuels anyway.
Electric cars, internet, automation. Demand for fossils fuels keeps going down.
Hard to say the drama wasn't necessary. Focus on the environment isn't a bad thing. Would we really be here without it?
Apparently, we don't need the support of the president or republicans to get things done.

I have found modern technology is a two-edged sword.
For example: atomic energy / atomic bomb
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Yes, me too. I was there for the global cooling scare.

However I see technology moving past dependence on fossil fuels anyway.

Electric cars, internet, automation. Demand for fossils fuels keeps going down.

Hard to say the drama wasn't necessary. Focus on the environment isn't a bad thing. Would we really be here without it?

Apparently, we don't need the support of the president or republicans to get things done.
There never was a scientifically promoted global cooling scare -- it's a denialist meme; an urban legend that's propagated over the years. http://physicstoday.scitation.org/do/10.1063/PT.5.8199/full/
Perhaps you're mistaking it for nuclear Winter, which is a whole other thing.
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
It was global warming in the 30's, global cooling when I went to school in the 70's, and we have the catch-all 'climate change' now for things like the record cold we just experienced in Michigan- but I think there are perfectly natural explanations for all of these yes.

There is no statistically significant measurable 'global 'warming going on for starters, we are lucky to live in a notably mild stable period, anything we can do to help delay the next ice age would be great, but a couple extra CO2 molecules in 10000 of air is nowhere near enough I fear
But there are statistically measurable changes. There are also retreating glaciers, arctic snowmelt, melting permafrost, earlier Springs, effervescent methane and arctic methane blasts.
 

Guy Threepwood

Mighty Pirate
But there are statistically measurable changes. There are also retreating glaciers, arctic snowmelt, melting permafrost, earlier Springs, effervescent methane and arctic methane blasts.

not statistically significant since the current anomally (+.41C) since 1979 falls well within the natural variation e.g. the globe cooled an entire degree from 1998 to 2000..

That's the cold hard satellite data, by far the most reliable data we have, land based weather stations are hopelessly inconsistent, patchy, fudgable for absolutely anything you want them to say.

there used to be a couple of MILES of ice above where I sit now only a few thousand years ago, glaciers and ice caps have been melting and retreating ever since, pray that does not stop/reverse in our lifetimes or we'll have a real climate problem to worry about!.

We just hit record shattering cold temps here a couple of weeks ago, call it a fluke if you like, that only highlights the same point: any 'AGW' is simply overwhelmed by natural variation in a dynamic climate
 

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
There never was a scientifically promoted global cooling scare -- it's a denialist meme; an urban legend that's propagated over the years. http://physicstoday.scitation.org/do/10.1063/PT.5.8199/full/
Perhaps you're mistaking it for nuclear Winter, which is a whole other thing.

Nope, I was there. Anyway the article didn't say there wasn't a scare, just that it didn't nearly have the scientific consensus that global climate change has today. So the comparison is silly.
 

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
I have found modern technology is a two-edged sword.
For example: atomic energy / atomic bomb

Yes and we've managed to not annihilate ourselves so far.

In anycase, technological advancement seems the only viable solution of getting of out of this mess.
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
Yes and we've managed to not annihilate ourselves so far.
In anycase, technological advancement seems the only viable solution of getting of out of this mess.

From man's viewpoint: yes.
We will never annihilate ourselves even though as Jeremiah 10:23 wrote that man can't direct his step.
King Solomon observed, at Ecclesiastes 8:9, that man dominates man to man's hurt or injury.
That is why, according to Scripture, the only viable solution is that God will have Jesus step in.
The 'mess', so to speak, is of human doing, and God's solution is about the good news of God's kingdom government of Daniel 2:44 in the hands of Christ Jesus for a thousand years is to have Jesus step in to get us out of this mess.
Isaiah 11:3-4; Revelation 19:14-16 tells us that the executional words from Jesus' mouth will rid the Earth of wickedness before Jesus, as Prince of Peace, will then usher in global Peace on Earth among persons of goodwill.
So, according to Scripture, the humble meek people will inherit the Earth as per Psalms 37:9-11; Matthew 5:5.
The wicked ( those ruining Earth - Revelation 11:18 B) will be destroyed forever - Psalms 92:7.
Then mankind will see the return of the Genesis ' tree of life ' on Earth for the healing of earth's nations as per Revelation 22:2
 

Yerda

Veteran Member
This is welcome news. The debate is over when one side resorts to goddidit.

Anthropomorphic climate change/ bad weather being caused by bad people... is probably the oldest superstition known to mankind, and there will always be people in power accepting sacrifices to appease Gaia. It can be adopted into pretty much any belief system, including atheism as we see
Hi, Guy. In no case I've ever read or heard has AGW been interchangable with bad weather and it isn't caused by bad people but by greenhouse gas emissions.

It was global warming in the 30's, global cooling when I went to school in the 70's, and we have the catch-all 'climate change' now for things like the record cold we just experienced in Michigan- but I think there are perfectly natural explanations for all of these yes.
I agree. Greenhouse gases make up a part of that natural explanation.

Guy Threepwood said:
There is no statistically significant measurable 'global 'warming going on for starters...
Can you elaborate on this sentence?

not statistically significant since the current anomally (+.41C) since 1979 falls well within the natural variation e.g. the globe cooled an entire degree from 1998 to 2000.
Can you share your source?

According to NASA 1998 was 0.64 C above the 1951-1980 baseline while 2000 was 0.42 C above the baseline. That's a change of -0.24 degrees. Also the current anomaly is about 0.82 C from 1979.
 
Top