There is nothing liberal about wanting good stewardship of the earth. There is something tragic in those who do not care for the earth enough to be good stewards.
:thumbsup: Agree.
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
There is nothing liberal about wanting good stewardship of the earth. There is something tragic in those who do not care for the earth enough to be good stewards.
Jefferson would be too busy cutting up Bibles, taking out references to the divinity of Christ, the virgin birth, the miracles and the resurrection. After all, there are numerous translations nowadays, not just the KJV that he could butcher to fit his un-Christian belief system.
I'm no tree-hugger by any stretch, but I agree wholeheartedly with this.
I wish you luck in making earth a better place to go to Hell from.
Actually Crabtownboy, YOU are correct. Man was given a stewardship responsibility LONG before he was given an evangelistic obligation.
Right, if it wasn't for "liberals" there would be no ethanol made from corn.
:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:
I agree ARBO, some here seem to be getting their knickers in knot for no reason, except that they like to throw around the "lib" label.
Scripture, please (of course, I know you won't give one, cause there is not one...)
I got no problem with conserving the earth and all but let's do it based on real facts and scientific study instead of fake reports and fear mongering propaganda.
Uh...in Genesis?
Give the scripture...
I am asking you, because this "Good stewardship" of the trees and cattle thing is much like the "God helps those who help themselves" verse...everyone seems to think its there, but its not....
Gen 8:26-30.
I am assuming your joking, since those are not actual Bible verses (I believe Genesis 8 ends at verse 22).
:wavey:
Gen 1:26-30.
Nothing in their about protecting the earth.
We are to SUBDUE (Kabash) the earth (literally to "tread down" or to conquer. It is a very negative word, that is used in several places in the Old Testament to denote annihilating an opposing army).
We are also to have dominion over the earth (radah). This also means to tread down, and is also a very negative term. For instance, Israelites are not to "radah" there brethren... "
Again, nothing in the scriptures about protecting trees, animals, and the environment. These things are all looked on as property of man that he is free to use however he desires.
But we can still be rational about it. One generation hasn't the right to deprive the next of say clean air and water for example.
Nothing in their about protecting the earth.
We are to SUBDUE (Kabash) the earth (literally to "tread down" or to conquer. It is a very negative word, that is used in several places in the Old Testament to denote annihilating an opposing army).
We are also to have dominion over the earth (radah). This also means to tread down, and is also a very negative term. For instance, Israelites are not to "radah" there brethren... "
Again, nothing in the scriptures about protecting trees, animals, and the environment. These things are all looked on as property of man that he is free to use however he desires.
I have no problem with reasonable protections of the environment. I just don't like people trying to invent Bible verses to support it.