God is not Green

[Daniel Wilson]

This is a subject that Greg Cochran has been blogging about lately on his blog doccochran.wordpress.com. This is his most recent post on the subject:

Recently, James Merritt, the young Christian largely responsible for the so-called Southern Baptist Environment & Climate Initiative, declared, “God is green.”
I would like to say simply and emphatically, “God is not green.” We do ourselves and the gospel no good when we adopt the categories of postmodern man and conform God to them.



I take this statement as one of naïveté. And it must not be allowed to stand. For one thing, the statement is, inherently, a political one. The term itself arises from the Green Party political movement. One can speak of concern for the environment or of human dominion over creation without calling himself green. To be green means to some degree to ascribe to a set of assumptions concerning the balance of nature. These assumptions are only inappropriately ascribed to God, which brings me to a second point—theology.



One can surely be sensitive to the environment and responsible for reducing pollution and waste. In a sense, this would mean being green (at least a little bit). But the green movement is, by and large, a movement toward monism (or one-ism); it is intentionally a move away from the personal, holy God of the Bible.



We must not fail to point this out at every turn. I have written an article about this before, but it is tremendously important. The people of America are in more danger from this theological monism than they are from Islam. Islam is murderous and dangerous to be sure. However, it is openly combative. We know its threat; it is the threat of a gun, a bomb, or a sword. Monism is more insidious; it destroys like termites destroy, from the inside out. It dissolves human beings and everything else into One. It is ironic, but monism dissolves everything into nothing. We become (as the Eastern religions put it) as a drop of water into the sea—irrelevant and absorbed nothingness.



The Green movement is, by and large, a movement toward monism. This monism recognizes human beings, animals, plants, spirits, and God as One. For monism, the key is to maintain the balance of the one (i.e., “the force”). To be green is to be in tune with the One, to be submitted to the premise of balance of all things; it is to forsake both justice and mercy, expecting everyone to “go with the flow.” Rest assured, God is not green."

[James Gibbons]

Laurel Esser said:

mmmmm, I don't think I said that, I think I said that we are to be responsible, I am not up for ignoring the problem or saying "who cares, it's all going to burn anyways", but I do think that we need to be careful how much time and energy we put into it. Our focus should be on the life after this one. Everything in this life will fade. Our hope is in Christ, not in our efforts to save the grass. I think that is a very reasonable response. I am not saying that being an environmentalist or being environmentally aware is a bad thing, I think it's a great thing...but I firmly believe that we need to make sure it's not our focus, and that our message goes beyond saving the trees. We have nothing material in this world, including this world that will not pass away.

My response wasn’t specifically aimed at you, Laurel, although the “reserved unto fire” comment prolly made it appear so. Sorry. I agree that politics should never be our focus, whether right or left. There are plenty of Christians who would agree with the statement (made by Jerry Falwell, I believe) that “God is a Republican,” but who would vehemently refute the statement that “God is Green.” Both statements are false, both marginalize God, and both attempt to co-opt His divinity for a political cause, which is wrong. Doesn’t necessarily negate or validate the cause itself.

Now, that what the rhetorical equivalent to nailing my foot to the floor and running in circles. Sorry.