The author of the letter in question showed eloquence in his writing but is misguided in his thinking. The author of the letter wants Baptist and other Christian leaders to care more about the cause of environmentalism. The problem with this is the Baptist Church as well as the broader Christian community is not currently advocating that people pollute and destroy the environment. The leader of largest sect of Christian belief, Pope Francis has given numerous speeches regarding the importance of curbing the effects of climate change on our earth.The author focusing solely on the Christian faith in a letter focused on finding a solution to climate change is strange. It is strange because man made climate change is something that all of mankind
…show more content…
Historically this is not always the case. Isaac Newton arguably the greatest scientific mind in documented human history had deeply held fundamentalist religious beliefs. Pope Francis the leader of the largest church in the world cares a great deal about human actions affecting the health of the earth. Former Vice President Al Gore is a Baptist and is one of the foremost leaders in the modern environmentalist movement. An entire paper could be written about the contribution religious people have made to environmentalism and science as a whole. The author of letter in his criticism of the religious seems to have forgotten all of the important contributions made to science by people who profess belief in a …show more content…
Everything a human ever does has an impact on the earth. The earth has an impact on the solar system. The solar system has an impact on the galaxy, the galaxy has an impact on the entire universe. The plight of a human is that it has an eternal impact on the universe as a whole and yet that human will only consciously get to see a infinitesimally small amount of its impact on the universe. We as humans are creatures tortured by the fact of our own mortality. The author of the letter seems to have no sympathy for the discomfort of the human. If he did have sympathy for the plight of the human then he would understand that a belief in a deity is an attempt to comfort ourselves against the harsh fact of mortal death. If the author understood the plight of the human he would also understand that his arguments on climate change are unimportant. This is because while the whole of humanity understands there’s only one earth, all of humanity deep down also understands they will live only one earthly life. If the human understands they will only live one earthly life, is it not also rational for them to want to live this life to its fullest? The vast majority of humans believe the answer to that question is yes, and in their pursuit to live the best life possible they over consume the resources of the earth. They over consume fossil fuels, mineral resources,
Historically this is not always the case. Isaac Newton arguably the greatest scientific mind in documented human history had deeply held fundamentalist religious beliefs. Pope Francis the leader of the largest church in the world cares a great deal about human actions affecting the health of the earth. Former Vice President Al Gore is a Baptist and is one of the foremost leaders in the modern environmentalist movement. An entire paper could be written about the contribution religious people have made to environmentalism and science as a whole. The author of letter in his criticism of the religious seems to have forgotten all of the important contributions made to science by people who profess belief in a …show more content…
Everything a human ever does has an impact on the earth. The earth has an impact on the solar system. The solar system has an impact on the galaxy, the galaxy has an impact on the entire universe. The plight of a human is that it has an eternal impact on the universe as a whole and yet that human will only consciously get to see a infinitesimally small amount of its impact on the universe. We as humans are creatures tortured by the fact of our own mortality. The author of the letter seems to have no sympathy for the discomfort of the human. If he did have sympathy for the plight of the human then he would understand that a belief in a deity is an attempt to comfort ourselves against the harsh fact of mortal death. If the author understood the plight of the human he would also understand that his arguments on climate change are unimportant. This is because while the whole of humanity understands there’s only one earth, all of humanity deep down also understands they will live only one earthly life. If the human understands they will only live one earthly life, is it not also rational for them to want to live this life to its fullest? The vast majority of humans believe the answer to that question is yes, and in their pursuit to live the best life possible they over consume the resources of the earth. They over consume fossil fuels, mineral resources,