Hip and Thigh: Smiting Theological Philistines with a Great Slaughter. Judges 15:8

Friday, December 04, 2009

False Prophets

From the introductory page of the Evangelical Climate Initiative

Now is the time for followers of Christ to help solve the global warming crisis. There is overwhelming evidence that human activity is a major cause, and we know that the impacts of climate change would be hardest on the poor and vulnerable, and on future generations. · We need to act, and everyone has a role. Christian leaders can join more than 280 other senior evangelical leaders who have signed the Evangelical Call to Action on Climate Change. As Christian citizens we can learn more, make personal changes, and rally action. For policymakers, it’s time to make wise and moral choices to protect God’s world and its people. · Join us. Take the next step. [emphasis mine]

From the Evangelical Climate Initiative section on science.

No one has a single “smoking gun” that could “prove” the anthropogenic influence on the climate system. That’s not the way science works. Our current best understanding of global warming is the product of over 100 years of thought and scientific research. We must appreciate the fundamental fact that nothing in science is ever “proven” (which is why we should never place our ultimate faith in any scientific claim). Our complete faith can only be in God as revealed in His word and in His Son!

But science can be very credible, and it can warrant a high degree of confidence. When climate scientists review the vast literature on climate change, as they did most recently in 2007, they say that they are 90% sure that people are warming the globe. That was the consensus position of all the scientists involved in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change process, which means that even government scientists from Saudi Arabia and the United States agreed. You wouldn’t get even the most convinced scientist to say he’s 100% sure of our current understanding of global warming, just that he’s very, very confident. That’s the nature of global warming science–it’s about the overwhelming preponderance of the evidence, not “proof” in the legal sense. [emphasis mine]

From the London Telegraph,

But perhaps the most damaging revelations ... are those concerning the way Warmist scientists may variously have manipulated or suppressed evidence in order to support their cause. [emphasis mine].
More links HERE [thanks to Steve Hays]

People. The next time there is a big push among evangelicals to sign the current popular declaration or initiative in spite of vast theological difference between interested parties, this amusing fiasco should be kept in mind. Herein lies one of the main reasons Christians should exercise caution and restraint when they are pressured to put their name on something just because it currently is the popular thing to do.

Labels: ,


Blogger Escovado said...

To add to your links: Fraudulent hockey sticks and hidden data

10:49 AM, December 04, 2009  
Blogger Craig and Heather said...

I agree that we must be careful not to sign anything out of pressure from others. However, do you think we should not sign what we believe to be true just because of 1)someone else signed it, or 2)because someone pressures us not to?

This is what I am having trouble with. I agree with you totally about this global warming thing, and I would not be in favor of the "common word between us" types of things that are very broad and open statements. However, I did sign the MC because 1) I agree with the 3 points made, 2) Those three points are definitely scriptural, and 3) because I don't really care who agrees with ME.

It may be a bit of hyperbole on my part, but just because Catholics breathe should I hold my breath? Where do we draw the line?

Make sense?

I don't understand the idea of saying others bowed to pressure, and then attempting to apply pressure.


6:48 PM, December 04, 2009  
Blogger Fred Butler said...

I understand the MD is much different than this evangelical climate initiative document. However, I do recall that when it first came on the scene, there was a similar appeal and push to all Christians to sign it. The arguments were similar in tone: it's not meant to be theological, etc. The issue with signing it was more along the lines of wise and prudent. Now it is clear such was wise and prudent NOT to have signed it. I think the MD can fall into similar things, especially when the initial drafters of the document, like Colson, insist that it should be a doctrinal statement. There is where I would draw the line as a committed Christian of rallying along side individuals I know for a fact are opposed to the biblical understanding of the gospel.

Not sure if you heard Phil's recent interview on Paul Edwards' program, but he makes a lot of good points you should ponder. Go to Phil's latest post to hear his interview. I think he has a copy of the MP3 on his Spurgeon site so you don't have to mess with listening to the entire 2 hour program.

10:20 PM, December 04, 2009  
Blogger Craig and Heather said...

Thanks for the link Fred,

I will look into it.


9:26 AM, December 05, 2009  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home