Southern Baptist leaders shift position on climate change

CNN ^ | March 10, 2008

[bd476]

(CNN) Several prominent leaders in the Southern Baptist Convention said Monday that Baptists have a moral responsibility to combat climate change -- a major shift within a denomination that just last year cast doubt on human responsibility for global warming.

Forty-six influential members of the Southern Baptist Convention, including three of its last four presidents, criticized their denomination in a statement Monday for being "too timid" in confronting global warming.

"Our cautious response to these issues in the face of mounting evidence may be seen by the world as uncaring, reckless and ill-informed," the statement says. "We can do better."

The Southern Baptist Convention, the largest Protestant denomination in the United States, adopted a resolution last year urging Baptists to "proceed cautiously in the human-induced global warming debate in light of conflicting scientific research." The resolution said "many scientists reject the idea of catastrophic human-induced global warming."

On Monday, however, dozens of Southern Baptist leaders expressed a different view.

"There is general agreement among those engaged with this issue in the scientific community," their statement says. "A minority of sincere and respected scientists offer alternate causes for global climate change other than deforestation and the burning of fossil fuels."

The signatories pledged to do their part to fight global warming "without any further lingering over the basic reality of the problem or our responsibility to address it. Humans must be proactive and take responsibility for our contributions to climate change--big and small."

The signatories include Frank Page, president of the Southern Baptist Convention since 2006; James Merritt, president of the convention from 2000 to 2002 and Jack Graham, president of the convention from 2002 to 2004. The group posted the statement on its Web site...

[Constitutionalist Conservative]

Nope, but I disagree with St. Paul on this and several other points. Fire away.

Perhaps on a thread that is more suited to your topic?

[driftdiver]

So can each of decide which parts of the Bible we don’t want to follow?

[bd476]

Just another Joe wrote: "Their collective minds are made up.'
Uh, you've heard the term, "herding cats"?
Well, that's about what it's like getting a collective mind out of a bunch of Baptists.
Why do you think Baptist churches always have so many Bible study classes?

I know, I am one.

Best news yet, Joe.

When the leaders of the Southern Baptist Convention put out the word or heads-up that following the solutions brought forth by the global warming crew is what God would have us do, are you saying that it would be unlikely that the Southern Baptist community would adhere to the recommended solutions?

[JackDanielsOldNo7]

Leave it to the Baptists to be behind the curve on EVERYTHING.Has anyone thought to tell them about the invention of the electric light and printing press

I also think they just discovered that missonary position is not the only sexual position.

[tobyhill]

This is extremely disappointing that Rev. Jack Graham would fall for this scam. He's the pastor of Prestonwood Baptist in Plano, Texas. We just had 6-8 inches of snow here in North Texas in the 2nd week of March so if that's the scientific evidence of Global Warming these pastors are dumber than a box of rocks.

[Just another Joe]

I'm saying that there would be a lot of Southern Baptists that would tell the Southern Baptist Convention exactly what they could do with their pronouncement.

Just because a church is a member of the Southern Baptist Convention does not mean that they are bound by anything the Convention pronounces.

I believe that's one reason the split was made from the Catholics.

Trying to get Baptists within a church to agree on something is bad enough.

[Lucky Dog]

The official position of the SBC is correct.

The Bible calls upon Christians to be “good stewards.” In most cases people just associate this admonition with funds. However, there is certainly a Biblical basis from which to say that the cautionary advice extends to all areas and resources in life.

That said, there is the question on the table as to whether or not trying to “solve” any human induced contribution to “global warming” is a good-stewardship use of resources. To properly address the issue, a few questions must first be answered.

The first question to be asked is “does global warming exist?” Of course, the answer to this question is obvious. The earth is definitely warmer now than it was during the last ice age. Based upon the geological record, it can be concluded that, both, global warming, and cooling, are cyclical and have, in the past, obviously, been driven by something other than human activity.

The next question to be asked: “is there any thing about the current global warming cycle that has been exacerbated by human activity?” Statistically, there is no proof that the current increases in temperature are anything more than random variation. However, the contrary conclusion is also possible: there is nothing to statistically say that the current temperatures are not something other than random variation. Therefore, it is not possible to definitively draw a conclusion that current temperatures are driven ay anything other than natural variation.

Consequently, the only answer to the previously posed question, at present, is based upon speculation. Some individuals have put forth mathematical models that tend to show carbon dioxide and other trace gases (so called green house gases) could be driving global warming. However, the first test of a mathematical model is, if applied retroactively, can it explain changes recorded in the past. The answer to this, for a number of reasons, is that the models currently cannot. Therefore, any conclusions drawn from these models are rightly subject to skepticism and, even, rejection.

The counter argument from those who would demand “human solutions” to the “global warming problem” is based upon the potential seriousness of the consequences. In other words, if, in deed, global warming is exacerbated by human activity and we wait to get definitive and irrefutable evidence, it may be too late to reverse the trend. This argument has some merit. Nonetheless, it fails miserably otherwise because of the same problem with the models. If those human activities such as producing so-called green house gases, etc., cannot be definitively tied to currently observed temperatures, how is it possible to know that reducing them would reverse any trend?

This discussion now returns to the original issue in the thread: should we (Christians: Baptists, Catholic, Methodists, etc.) attempt to do anything about environment because of our Biblical charge to be good stewards? I think there are some obvious answers, but limited ones. Should Christians trying to be good stewards avoid profligate littering or should we recycle materials that require expensive landfills and take excessive time to degrade back to environmentally neutral compounds? The answer is yes provided that doing so does not divert resources from more pressing humanitarian needs. However, the real issue is of stewardship is much more complicated when discussing “global warming.”

Should we use money and other resources attempting to “solve global warming” that could, alternatively, be used to ease the suffering of our fellow humans and bring the message of salvation them? The answer to this question is where the implied message reported by CNN in this thread as made by some but no means all, or even a significant percentage of Southern Baptists is, IMHO, completely in error.

[DFG]

Jack Graham’s email address is jgraham@prestonwood.org.
Please send him an email about the SBC leadership’s stupid opinion on “Global Warming”.

[Walmartian]

While Dr. Frank Page may be a signatory it doesn't appear to be one of his issues of importance. SBC President's Page - Issues of Importance

[Enosh]

We should have the wisdom to discern the meaning.

Judges 10:14, chastisement or directive?

[Resolute Conservative]

We did not suffer from this kind of policy mess when Adrian Rogers was still here. He tended to the flock. We need more from his mold.

[Walmartian]

Jimmy Carter’s Southern Baptist church in Plains Georgia (where he is a Sunday school teacher) is a member of the Southern Baptist Convention. I think he used to be president of the United States but his beliefs are not those of the SBC entirely.

[Crush T Velour]

How typical of the Southern Baptists to hop on a fad 15 years late just as it is going out of style.

[Alex Murphy]

Forty-six influential members of the Southern Baptist Convention, including three of its last four presidents, criticized their denomination in a statement Monday for being "too timid" in confronting global warming.

Jesus died for your SUV ping

[monday]

“Forty-six influential members of the Southern Baptist Convention, including three of its last four presidents...”

Are brain dead morons.

[TheBattman]

Dude - as I said - don’t bunch all Baptists under the same umbrella. There is a reason there are many different Baptist associations (and independents)!

Huckabee is Southern Baptist...

[rhombus]

OK Southern Baptist... is that like the Sunnis or the Shia? Are there all sorts of Mormons too? Which ones are the cult that so many just couldn't stop talking about? How about I just don't group all religions under the same umbrella? Every day, I get closer to being a follower of Christopher Hitchens when it comes to organized religion... any way. ;-)

[Blogger]

The thing you have to realize is that the SBC is NOT a governing body for the churches. No official resolution from the SBC has been made. Only a few past and present leaders have joined as signatories concerning this effort. Resolutions are only made after a vote of the representatives of the Convention’s individual churches. I doubt such a vote would survive, though given the right person pitching it, it might as well.

There are several past presidents whose names I do not see on the list and some big names in the denomination. Dr. Al Mohler, for example, while a good friend of James Merritt and president of the flagship seminary of the convention, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, is not on the list. Paige Patterson, President at Southwestern and key leader in the conservative resurgence of the SBC is also not listed. Richard Land, who heads up the SBC on the Ethical Commission is not listed. And, there are many others.

This effort, therefore, is one reflecting the views of some individual leaders in the SBC but can not be said to be an SBC effort as a whole. Until the whole convention votes on the matter, nothing has been said in the name of the entire convention. Hopefully, nothing ever will be said.

[kailbo]

The position I have heard in support of Paul is the following verse, which goes on to say that Adam wasn’t the one who was fooled, but rather Eve. The argument goes that its not only a cultural fact of that period because Paul compared that statement with the events in the Garden.

[Enosh]

Exactly. In St. Paul’s time, immanent parosia was anticipated, which explains his advice to “stay as you are” in 1 Corinthians 7, (1-C-7:17), and explains his attitude elsewhere.

While we are told to be ready, (by Christ), we are not told to live under a rock, (except by St. Paul.)