Geographic names in New Zealand often reflect its native people and European settlement. Some place names were given by Māoris, explorers, surveyors and administrators. Others are named after British places and battles, historical events, immigrant ships, and important people (explorers, cultural heroes, political heroes, government officials, pioneers, and royalty). Each geographic name has a story associated with it. So, where is Zion and what’s its story?
“Zion” is a word that’s associated with God’s people in both the Old and New Testaments of the Bible. The Hebrew word translated “Zion” Tsiyyon (Strongs #6726) occurs 152 times in the Old Testament (mainly in the Psalms and prophets).
Hill of Ophel
In about 1,000 BC, king David captured the fortress of Zion from the Jebusites (2 Sam. 5:6-10; 1 Chron. 11:4-9). The Jebusites were Canaanites (Gen. 10:15-16; Jud. 19:10) and their city Jebus (Jerusalem) was a natural fortress because it was on a ridge that was surrounded on three sides by steep valleys (Kidron, Hinnom, and Tyropoeon). This site was also called the “hill of Ophel”, which was in Jerusalem near the Water Gate and Gihon Spring (2 Chron. 27:3; 33:14; Neh. 3:26NIV). The spring was an essential water supply for the fortress. About 250-300 years after David’s victory, Kings Jotham and Manasseh strengthened the fortifications at Ophel.
When David took up residence at Ophel he “called it the City of David” (2 Chron. 32:30; 33:14). It was his royal city, where he built his palace and ruled over Israel. After David brought the ark to Ophel (Zion), it also became a sacred place where the priests and Levites regularly offered praise and worship to God (2 Sam. 6:10-19; 1 Chron. 16:1-38). David called it God’s “holy hill” (Ps. 3:4; 15:1ESV). So Ophel (Zion) was the key place in Israel for government and worship during the reign of King David. And it was still called Zion when king Solomon dedicated the temple in 966 BC (1 Ki. 8:1; 2 Chron. 5:2).
So in the first instance, Zion referred to the hill of Ophel which was the site of a Jebusite fortress and the City of David.
During David’s reign the city of Jerusalem expanded towards the north. And after king Solomon built the Israelite temple on the threshing floor of Araunah the Jebusite (2 Chron. 3:1), it became known as Mount Zion. This hill had been called Mount Moriah in Abraham’s time about 880 years earlier.
When the temple was dedicated, it was filled with a cloud which represented God’s presence (1 Ki. 8:10-12; 2 Chron. 5:13-14; 7:1-3). In this aspect it was similar to the tabernacle (Ex. 40:34-38). The temple was God’s dwelling place (Isa. 8:18; Ps. 132:7, 13). That’s where the Israelites went to meet God (Jer. 31:6). And that’s why Mount Zion was called, “the place of the Name of the Lord Almighty” (Isa. 18:7). This cloud occupied the temple for about 375 years until it departed in the days of Ezekiel (Ezek. 10).
Because the temple was the centre of Israelite praise and worship, God calls Mount Zion “my holy hill” (Ps. 2:6ESV). The temple gave it holiness. That’s where the priests and Levites regularly offered praise and worship to God. That’s where Jewish men travelled to three times a year for major religious festivals (Ex. 23:14-17; 34:18-23; Dt. 16:16). So the temple was the center of their spiritual life. It was the center of Jewish religion.
So in the second instance, Zion referred to the temple mount which was north of the hill of Ophel.
The word “Zion” can also refer to Jerusalem – it’s often used as a synonym for Jerusalem (2 Ki. 19:21; Ps. 69:35; Isa. 1:8; 40:9). This is clearest in poetic passages where “Zion” is the parallel term to “Jerusalem” (Ps. 51:18; 76:2; 102:21; 135:21; 147:12; Isa. 2:3; 33:20; 37:32; 40:9; 41:27; 62:1; Jer. 26:18; 51:35; Amos 1:2; Zeph. 3:14). In these instances, “Zion” and “Jerusalem” can also be figures of speech for the inhabitants of Jerusalem or for the land of Judah or Israel or for the Jewish people as a whole.
Jerusalem is also called God’s “holy hill” (Ps. 48:1NET)(Jer. 31:23; Dan. 9:6; 20ESV). The city is said to be holy because it includes the temple. Joel gives a warning in Zion, God’s holy hill and promises future peace (Joel 2:1; 3:17). Likewise, God promises to return to Zion, the holy hill, and bring back the Jews to restore Jerusalem after their Babylonian captivity (Zech. 8:3).
In Psalm 48, Jerusalem is called “Zion”, “Mount Zion”, “the city of the Lord Almighty” and “the city of our God”. In Psalm 87, Jerusalem is called “Zion” and “city of God”. In captivity, the Jews said “By the rivers of Babylon we sat and wept when we remembered Zion” (Ps. 137:1-5). The Babylonians had asked them, “Sing us one of the songs of Zion!”, but they couldn’t do this because they were committed to not forget Jerusalem.
So in the third instance, Zion referred to the city of Jerusalem or its inhabitants or the kingdom associated with Jerusalem.
Following the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, the name Zion was assigned to its present location across the Tyropoeon Valley (see Josephus). Apparently the upper room where Jesus celebrated the Passover (Mk. 14:15; Lk. 22:12) and the room where the disciples gathered after Christ’s ascension (Acts 1:13) were in this area. So, today the more dominant western hill is called “Mount Zion”.
So in the fourth instance, Zion refers to the hill west of the Tyropoeon Valley. This means that “Zion” has been used to describe three hills in Jerusalem: the hill of Opel, the temple mount, and the western hill.
In the coming millennial kingdom “the Lord Almighty will reign on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem” (Isa. 24:23). In that day Jerusalem will be the religious and political capital of the world (Isa. 2:2-4; 25:6-8; Mic. 4:1-3, 7). Once again, God calls Zion “my holy hill” (Joel 3:17). That’s where Christ reigns and where people worship Him (Ps. 99:2,9). As king David ruled Israel from Jerusalem (Zion), so in future Jesus will rule the world from Jerusalem (Zion).
So in the fifth instance, Zion refers to the city of Jerusalem. This is similar to the third instance only Christ will be personally present, and not just represented by a cloud.
The Greek word translated “Zion” (Sion, Strongs #4622), occurs seven times in the New Testament. Five of these are synonyms of Jerusalem from the Old Testament prophets (Mt. 21:5; Jn. 12:15; Rom. 9:33; 11:26; 1 Pt. 2:6). Another seems to refer to the second coming, which results in Christ’s Millennial reign in Jerusalem (Rev. 14:1). We will now look at the other instance of “Zion” in the New Testament.
In the New Testament “Mount Zion” refers metaphorically to the heavenly Jerusalem, God’s holy, eternal city. Hebrews says, “But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem” (Heb. 12:22). This is the eternal dwelling place of God and His people (Rev. 21:2 – 22:5).
Just as there is an earthly Mount Zion in Jerusalem, so there will be a heavenly Mount Zion and new Jerusalem (Gal. 4:25-26). As the Bible progresses, the word Zion expands in scope and takes on an additional, spiritual meaning. As king David ruled Israel from Jerusalem (Zion), so in future Jesus will rule the universe from the new heavenly Jerusalem (Zion).
So in the sixth instance, Zion refers to the new heavenly Jerusalem inhabited eternally by God and His people.
Lessons for us
So the story behind Zion stretches from about 3,000 years ago into the eternal future. Zion was a holy place for the Jews because that was where God dwelt. This was true for the hill of Ophel, the Temple Mount and for the city of Jerusalem. But according to the Bible, God the Holy Spirit now lives in Christians. They are said to be temples of the Holy Spirit. This means that instead of holy places, we now have holy people. Does our practice match our position? Do we respect each other as being holy?
In the coming stages of God’s plan of salvation, Zion is associated with both Christ’s earthly reign from Jerusalem and with God’s eternal reign from the new heavenly Jerusalem. Are we looking forward to this time? Does it encourage us in our Christian lives?
Written, August 2016
I have been asked this question: “Where is the place of the demon on air? For Daniel prayed and the prince of Persia held the Amen of his prayer”.
The Prince of Persia
“The prince of Persia” is mentioned in Daniel 10:13, 20. The book of Daniel was probably written about 530 BC. Daniel had been exiled to Babylon in about 605 BC and the exile finished when Zerubbabel returned to Jerusalem in 538 BC. His book is historical narrative (Ch. 1-6) and apocalyptic (Ch. 7-12).
Chapter 10 describes Daniel’s vision of a heavenly man in 537 BC. When Daniel received a vision of a great war, he was disturbed and prayed for God’s help. Then he mourned for three weeks until he had the vision of the heavenly man who was probably an angel (Dan. 10:5-21). The angel said that Daniel’s prayer had been heard and the angel had been sent to help him. But the angel had been delayed for 21 days by the prince of “the Persian kingdom”, presumably a demon associated with the Persian Empire (Note that the archangel Michael is called a “prince” in Daniel 10:13, 21; 12:1). The angel said that the archangel Michael had helped them overcome the demon. This vision made Daniel weak and speechless, but the angel strengthened him. The angel came to reveal future events to Daniel. And after this, the angel would return to oppose the prince of Persia once again and later on the prince of Greece (presumably a demon associated with the Greek Empire) would come.
This shows that there was a spiritual battle going on. God’s prophet Daniel was being opposed by a particular demon that was associated with the Persian government. Maybe they were influencing the government to make life difficult for Daniel This opposition caused the answer to Daniel’s prayer to be delayed. But God’s angel protected Daniel from the demon’s influence and the prayer was eventually answered.
Likewise, the Christian life is a spiritual battle: “For our struggle is not against flesh and blood (people), but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms” (Eph. 6:12NIV). Here Satan and demons are described as powerful beings that occupy the unseen heavenly realm.
The ruler of the kingdom of the air
The question is “Where is the place of the demon on air”? The word “air” isn’t mentioned in the passage in Daniel 10, but is mentioned in a New Testament passage: “As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient” (Eph. 2:1-2).
Ephesians 2:1-3 shows our situation before becoming Christians. Here unbelievers are said to be spiritually dead (separated from God) and following the ways of Satan, who is “the ruler of the kingdom of the air”. Elsewhere Satan is called “the prince of this world”, “the god of this age”, and the whole world is said to be under his control (Jn. 14:30; 2 Cor. 4:3-4; 1 Jn. 5:19). There are three possible interpretations of “the kingdom of the air”:
– It’s the realm under Satan’s influence which is described elsewhere as “this world”, “the whole world”, and “this age”.
– It’s the realm occupied by demons. This may be part of the “heavenly realms” occupied by demons (evil spirits) (Eph. 1:3; 6:12). Christ is in the heavenly realms (Eph. 1:20) as are angels, Satan and demons (Eph. 3:10). Also, the Greek word translated “air” (aeros, Strongs #109) means the lower atmosphere and according to Jewish opinion, the demons occupy this realm (Thayer’s Greek Lexion).
– It’s Satan’s world system, his philosophy of life, which includes religion and righteousness without God, as well as sin. People in this system are subject to Satan’s influence.
The Greek word translated “spirit” (pneumatos, Strongs #4151) in Ephesians 2:2 means the influence which governs someone or the source of power, affection, emotion or desire (Thayer’s Greek Lexion). It’s saying that Satan is the dominant influence in the lives of non-Christians.
Heaven and earth
The activities of Satan and demons are more important than their place or location. As they are spirits without a body, they don’t necessarily occupy a physical place like we do. It’s clear that Satan and demons have access to both God in heaven and humanity on earth (Job 2:1-2).
Satan continually accuses believers before God (Rev. 12:10). For example, he questioned Job’s faithfulness (Job. 1:9-11; 2:4) and questioned the fitness of the Jews to carry out priestly functions after the exile (Zech. 3:1-5). But in future Satan will be evicted from heaven.
Satan impacts on God’s people as a “roaring lion” (1 Pt.5:8) and an “angel of light” (2 Cor. 11:14). As a roaring lion, Satan devours and destroys. For example, Jews and Christians have been persecuted for thousands of years. As an angel of light, Satan deceives both believers (2 Cor. 11:3-4) and unbelievers (Rev. 20:3). He propagates a counterfeit Jesus, a counterfeit spirit, and a counterfeit gospel. And his false apostles can prophesy future events and do miracles, including healing (Mt. 7:22-23; 2 Cor. 11:13). He also convinces people that he doesn’t exist. But in future Satan will be evicted from the earth.
Satan is also called “the tempter”, because he tempts people to sin (Mt. 4:3; 1 Th. 3:5). As Adam and Eve and Jesus were tempted to disobey God, so Satan tempts us all 1 Cor. 10:13).
Fortunately, the evil acts of people and Satan are under God’s control (Job 1:12; Acts 4:28). So God restrains Satan and his demons. Satan is restrained in stages. Jesus did it when He was on earth (Mt. 12:29). It was guaranteed by the death and resurrection of Christ (Heb. 2:14). In future Satan won’t be able to deceive the nations during the millennial reign of Christ (Rev. 20:1-3). And it will be eternally true when he is cast into the lake of fire (Rev. 20:10).
Though Satan has been defeated, and eventually will be thrown into the lake of fire, he is still actively spreading evil. Christians need to understand who he is, and what he is able to do while he is still active.
Written, August 2016
The Olympic Games at Rio de Janeiro, began with a spectacular opening ceremony, which included fireworks, more than 6,000 dancers and Brazil’s most famous song, “The Girl from Ipanema”. Over 11,000 athletes are competing in 306 events and 28 sports.
Competition and cooperation
These sports are performance driven – athletes are rated and rewarded according to their performance. But the Bible says that we are all important because we are all made “in the image of God “Gen. 1:26-27NLT). So let’s not value people according to their performance on the sporting arena or their performance in any other avenue of life.
Sports can bring out the best and the worst in people. How do we compete in sports and as a spectator? Do we respect other competitors? Do we respect coaches? Do we respect marshals, umpires and referees? Do we respect other spectators?
Sports can build character. Athletes need to respect and build relationships with team mates. This is particularly important in team sports where cooperation is vital. What about us? Let’s be good team mates by encouraging one another in our teams at work or church. And by forgiving one another.
Commitment and dedication
Athletes commit to training schedules that require discipline, perseverance and endurance. This is challenging and athletes push themselves to the limit. The Christian life is like a race (2 Tim. 4:7) – it requires discipline and endurance to get through life’s trials and temptations. The Bible says, “let us run with endurance the race God has set before us” (Heb. 12:1).
Christians are to be involved and obedient like athletes, and not like spectators (2 Tim. 2:5). In the context of Christian service, Paul says “.. train yourself to be godly. Physical training is good, but training for godliness is much better, promising benefits in this life and in the life to come” (1 Tim. 4:7-8). He’s saying that spiritual fitness is better that physical fitness. As physical training takes dedication and effort, spiritual training in godliness also takes dedication and effort.
Sports are games and the Olympics are called “Games”. Sport is play and not work (although it’s an occupation for professional athletes). Let’s keep this in mind when we watch the competitions. Let’s not value the game so highly that it becomes an idol that separates us from God.
Greek athletes competed for the “victors crown” (2 Tim. 2:5NIV), which was a wreath placed on the head of a victorious athlete. Paul uses this to illustrate Christians as striving for the prize of a reward for their faithful service for Christ: “Don’t you realize that in a race everyone runs, but only one person gets the prize? So run to win! All athletes are disciplined in their training. They do it to win a prize (crown) that will fade away, but we do it for an eternal prize (crown)” (1 Cor. 9:24-25). He’s saying that we should all run like winners. The goal of winning determines an athlete’s lifestyle. Likewise, striving for the eternal “crown of life” should characterize a Christian’s lifestyle (Jas. 1:12).
There is a silent spectator watching the Olympic Games at Rio. The statute of “Christ the Redeemer” towers over the city. With a height of 30 metres (98 ft), on an 8 metre (26 ft) pedestal, it looks down from the top of Mount Corcovado, 700-metre (2,300 ft) above sea level. The statue, which can be seen from almost anywhere in Rio de Janeiro, is one of the main landmarks of Brazil. It can be a reminder of our spiritual lives. What do we think about Jesus? If we claim to be a Christian how committed and dedicated are we to serving Him?
Finally, are we “one of Jesus’ athletes” like in this children’s song?
Grab your sneakers, Tie your laces
Pull your socks up, Do you stretches
Hear the Marshall, On your marks
Ready set go, Out of the blocks
In my dreams I have been an Olympic athlete
I’ve been striving for gold down at Rio
In my life I can be one of Jesus’ athletes
And His golden reward lasts forever
Feel the spirit, Hold the torch
Carry the flame, Run the course
Cheer the Aussies, Olympic Games
Patriotic, Fade away
In my dreams I have been an Olympic athlete
I’ve been striving for gold down at Rio
In my life I can be one of Jesus’ athletes
And His golden reward lasts forever
(Neil Holman, 2000)
Written, August 2016
First Aid (Emergency First Response) courses teach us how to sustain life when there can be a danger of death. We follow the acrostic DRSABC: Danger, Response, Send for help, Airway, Breathing and CPR. We need oxygen and blood circulation to keep living. This is threatened in drownings and heart attacks. That’s why the treatment is cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). Death results if severe blood loss from arteries and veins isn’t stopped as can occur in car accidents and stabbings.
The Bible often uses figurative language to describe death. The main word used in this sense is “blood”. In order to understand this symbolism we will look at the usage of the word “blood” in the Old Testament, where “blood” is often a symbol of death. Likewise, the mention of Christ’s blood in the New Testament is a figurative way of referring to His death.
“Blood” in the Old Testament
The word “blood” (dam Strong’s #1818) is used in several senses in the Old Testament. The literal meanings include: the fluid flowing in arteries and veins of animals and people, which is essential for life (Gen. 9:4; Lev. 17:11, 14); and the blood of an animal sacrifice that could take the place of a sinner’s death in dealing with their sin (Lev. 17:11). The figurative meanings include: death (Num. 35:33; Josh. 2:19, Ezek. 5:17); killing a person (bloodshed), as in murder or capital punishment (Gen. 9:6; Dt. 17:8); killing an animal (Lev. 17:3-4); guilt (Lev. 20:9); a red color (2 Ki. 3:22); and wine, which is the juice of the grape (Gen. 49:11).
So the word “blood” is often used in the Bible as a figure of speech. And it has a range of meanings.
The meaning of atonement
The Hebrew word translated “atone” (kapar, Strong’s #3722) means to cover over or make amends. For example, the timbers of Noah’s ark were covered inside and outside with pitch (Gen. 6:14). In the other 103 occurrences of the word it means being made right with God by the forgiveness of sins. For example, animal sacrifices are said to “make atonement for them for the sin they have committed, and they will be forgiven” (Lev. 4:20, 26, 31, 35; 5:6, 10, 13, 16, 18; 6:7NIV). In this case the animal took the penalty as a substitute. An innocent animal took the punishment that was due to a guilty person.
Recently a Saudi blogger was sentenced to 1000 lashes for criticizing Islamic clerics, and seven religious freedom advocates offered to take the floggings in his place. That’s like atonement; when someone else takes your punishment.
Let’s look at some examples of the usage of the word “blood” in the Old Testament.
Abel – Murder
The first mention of the word “blood” in the Bible is associated with Abel. After Cain killed Abel, God told him, “Your brother’s blood cries out to me from the ground” (Gen. 4:10). This is a figure of speech called personification because blood doesn’t literally cry out. It means that there is a need for justice to be done. And justice was done when Cain was punished by losing his livelihood of cropping the land and he became a nomad. Here the word “blood” symbolizes death or murder. When Jesus summarized martyrdom in the Old Testament, He mentioned, “from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah” (Lk. 11:51), which means from the death of Abel to the death of Zechariah.
Noah – Lifeblood and murder
After the flood, God commanded Noah, “you must not eat meat that has its lifeblood still in it. And for your lifeblood I will surely demand an accounting. I will demand an accounting from every animal. And from each human being, too, I will demand an accounting for the life of another human being. Whoever sheds human blood, by humans shall their blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made mankind” (Gen. 9:4-6). Here the term “shedding blood” means murder. In this way, the word “blood” is associated with death. People are valuable because they are made in the image of God. That’s why the Israelites were told that execution was to be the punishment for murder (Ex. 21:12-14; Num. 35:16-32).
In this passage “blood” is associated with life and death. We know that if too much blood is lost from the body, life is replaced with death. In this sense blood is the life of the body. That’s why it’s translated “lifeblood”. But blood has no life on its own. Blood inside the body is a sign of life, while blood outside the body can be a sign of death. So blood can be associated with both life and death. But we will see that in the Bible it’s usually associated with death.
After the flood they were they were allowed to eat meat but prohibited from eating blood. This command was also given to the Israelites (Lev. 3:17; 7:26-27; 17:10-14; 19:26; Dt.12:15-16, 20-28; 15:23; 1 Sam. 14:32-35). And this is still one of the regulations today for Jewish kosher food. Both physical and spiritual reasons were probably behind this prohibition. Blood present in meat means it is not fully cooked, and eating uncooked meat can lead to disease or sickness. Another two reasons are given in this passage: “I will set my face against any Israelite or any foreigner residing among them who eats blood, and I will cut them off from the people. For the life of a creature is in the blood, and I have given it to you to make atonement for yourselves on the altar; it is the blood that makes atonement for one’s life” (Lev. 17:10-11). First, it was essential for life – “the life of a creature is in the blood” (Lev. 17:11, 14; Dt. 12:23). Second, because blood had a special role in animal sacrifices, it was not to be eaten as part of their food.
Joseph – Apparent violent death
When Joseph’s brothers sold him as a slave, they deceived their father by dipping his multicolored robe in goat’s blood and taking it to him. Then Jacob said, “It is my son’s robe! Some ferocious animal has devoured him. Joseph has surely been torn to pieces” (Gen. 37:33). So blood on the clothing was taken to be evidence of a violent death.
Moses – Animal sacrifices and forgiveness
In the first Passover each Israelite household in Egypt killed a lamb and put the blood around their front door. At midnight all the firstborn Egyptians and their animals were struck dead. But God told the Israelites “when I see the blood (around your doorways), I will pass over you” (Ex. 12:13). None of the Israelites died because a lamb had died instead of them. They benefited from the animal’s death.
The word “blood” is mentioned 88 times in the book of Leviticus. That’s the greatest number of any book in the Bible. On these occasions blood is associated with burnt, fellowship, sin and guilt offerings; offerings for ceremonial uncleanness; the dedication of Israelite priests; not eating blood; or it’s a symbol of murder (bloodshed), atonement (17:11), or death (20:9).
The blood of slaughtered animals was a part of the Israelites’ offerings. In the burnt, fellowship and guilt offerings, the priests splashed blood on the altar (Lev. Ch 1, 3, 7). And in the sin offering, the priest sprinkled blood in front of the curtain to the Most Holy Place as well (Lev. 4). But these offerings for sin couldn’t address unknown sins. Because of such sins, the tabernacle, the land and the nation were ceremonially unclean. So God instituted the Day of Atonement for the compete atonement of all sin (Lev. 16:33).
Blood was a significant part of the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur) (Lev. 16). This was the only day of the year when the High Priest could enter the most Holy Place of the tabernacle/temple. A bull was killed and he sprinkled the blood on the ark of the covenant and in front of it to atone for the sins of his household. Then he did the same with the blood of a goat to atone for the Israelites’ sins. Then he put some of this blood on the horns of the altar. God wanted His people to know what happened in secret in the tabernacle. So the High Priest put his hands on another goat and confessed their sins and the scapegoat was taken away and released in the wilderness. Symbolically it carried away the sins of the people.
In all these cases, innocent animal life was given up to protect human life. The animals die so that the people can live. The Bible says that “the wages of sin is death” (Rom. 6:23). The judgment and penalty for their sins were carried out through a transfer of the sin of the people to the animal sacrifice. Forgiveness is possible because the penalty of sin (death) is transferred to a sacrificial animal. The animal’s blood was evidence that the penalty had been paid. The transfer was also depicted by the scapegoat.
This is summarized in the New Testament, “the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed (ceremonially purified) with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness” (Heb. 9:22). So in the animal sacrifices, blood stood for death and judgment. But it also enabled God’s people to continue living godly lives.
Moses – Covenant making
After God gave the Israelites the ten commandments and other instructions, Moses wrote them down (Ex. 24:3-8). He then read them to the people, and they promised to obey them. Then Moses built an altar and animals were slaughtered as offerings to God on the altar and the blood was splashed on the altar and splashed on the people. The blood on the altar symbolized God’s part in the covenant (His forgiveness) and the blood on the people symbolized their obligation to obey the covenant. The blood probably symbolized that they would die (like the sacrificial animal) if they broke the covenant (Gen. 15:10-18; Jer. 34:18-19). So the Mosaic covenant was confirmed by blood from animal sacrifices (Ex. 24:6-8).
Other examples of “blood” in the Old Testament
Murderers are sometimes identified by blood on their clothes or shoes. So they were referred to as having on them the blood of the person they killed. Since murder demanded punishment, the person who carried this out was said to be avenging the murdered person’s blood (Num. 35:19, 26-27; Ps. 79:10). This was said to take the blood away from those responsible to take vengeance, and to return it to the head of the murderer (1 Ki. 2:29-34). Murder is said to pollute the land (Num. 35:33; Ps. 106:38). It needs atonement: “Bloodshed pollutes the land, and atonement cannot be made for the land on which blood has been shed, except by the blood of the one who shed it” (Num. 35:33). Here murder is called “bloodshed” and “blood” stands for the death of the murderer.
To kill someone for no reason is to “sin against innocent blood” (1 Sam. 19:5ESV). Jeremiah said if they killed him, they would bring “the guilt of innocent blood” upon themselves (Jer. 26:15). If a person deserved to be put to death, or if they caused their own death, their blood was said to be on their own head and not on someone else’s (Josh. 2:19; 2 Sam. 1:16; 1 Ki. 2:37).
The symbolism of blood in the Old Testament
God chose blood as a symbol of life and death because of what it is. Blood is associated with both life and death. It’s a mixture of cells (red, white and platelets) and plasma that’s pumped through the arteries and capillaries to provide oxygen and nutrients to every cell of the body. The veins also carry away waste products. The loss of too much blood, without a transfusion, can lead to death, which is loss of life. The Bible says that “The body without the spirit is dead” (Jas. 2:26). Likewise, the body without sufficient oxygenated blood is dead. When our circulatory system stops, we die. That’s why CPR is important.
For us today, blood is mainly a symbol of life. Blood tests monitor our health and blood transfusions help to sustain life. If you Google “blood” and “death”, you mainly get web pages on computer games! Today blood is mainly associated with death when there is terrorism and war. But in ancient times, blood was mostly a symbol of death.
In animal sacrifices an innocent animal was a substitute for a guilty person. It took the penalty for their sin and rebellion against God. There was no other way to escape this death penalty. Likewise, Jesus Christ died for people like us who sin and rebel against God. He is our substitute. There was no other way of salvation to escape this death penalty. The Bible says, “For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Rom. 6:23). And “While we were still sinners, Christ died for us” (Rom. 5:8). Have you accepted God’s gift that replaces our destiny of eternal death with eternal life?
An animal sacrifice also included a cost to the person giving the sacrifice. Animals were valuable to them. The price of the animal involved represented a price that had to be paid by the one providing the offering. Each time an animal sacrifice was made, the person giving it was reminded of the cost of sin. What about us? When are we reminded of the seriousness and the cost of sin? Does the Lord’s Supper help us remember this?
Day of atonement
Each year the High Priest entered the Most Holy Place of the tabernacle by means of the blood of animal sacrifices so the sins of the people could be forgiven. This was a physical picture of what Jesus did for us. He entered God’s presence by His death (“His own blood”) for our eternal redemption (Heb. 9:11-14. His was a superior sacrifice – it only needed to be done once, not annually. It superseded all the sacrifices associated with the day of atonement.
Isaiah described it as “he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was on him, and by his wounds we are (spiritually) healed” (Isa. 53:5; 1 Pt. 2:24-25). Jesus died for our sins like a sacrificial animal. The innocent for the guilty. As our substitute; to make us right with God.
Pope Francis has just visited the former Nazi death camp Auschwitz where Maximillian Kolbe died. In 1941 when a prisoner escaped from the camp, the Nazis selected 10 others to be killed by starvation in reprisal for the escape. One of the 10 men selected to die began to cry: “My wife! My children! I will never see them again!” At this Maximilian Kolbe stepped forward and asked to die in his place. And his request was granted. The innocent substituted for the condemned and took the punishment.
Blood of the covenant
As Moses was the mediator of the old covenant that was ratified by “the blood of the covenant” (Ex. 24:8; Heb. 9:20) when blood was sprinkled on the people, Jesus was the mediator of the new covenant when He died. His death brought in the new covenant. As the death of animals, symbolized by their blood, atoned for the sins of the Israelites, Christ’s death atones for the sins of all who accept His sacrifice.
This relates to the Lord’s supper. After He drank from the cup of wine, Jesus said, “This is my blood of the (new) covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins” and “This cup is the new covenant in my blood” (Mt. 26:28; Lk. 22:20; 1 Cor. 11:25). So Jesus is quoting from Exodus. Only this time He’s using a figure of speech in using the word “blood” to stand for His death. Did you know that the cup of wine in the Lord’s Supper represents the death of Jesus? How does this work? We have seen that in the Old Testament, the word “blood” can be used figuratively for the word “death”. Also wine is called “the blood of grapes” (Gen. 49:11; Dt. 32:14; Isa. 63:2). I suppose this came from the fact that if you crush grapes you get wine, while if you stab an animal you get blood. So death is linked to wine because they are both linked to blood in the Old Testament.
This was a superior covenant because it fulfilled the old one. Christ’s sacrificial death (which is called “blood” in the New Testament) fulfilled the animal sacrifices of the old covenant (Heb. 9:7-28; 13:11-12).
Although today we see blood as a life-giving substance, the Old Testament often uses the word “blood” as a symbol of death. Likewise, the mention of Christ’s blood in the New Testament is a figurative way of referring to His death. For example, “God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of his blood—to be received by faith” (Rom. 3:25). His death is described as “the shedding of His blood” and elsewhere as “His blood” or “the blood of Christ”, and it was like “a sacrifice of atonement”. Let’s remember it’s not referring to the fluid flowing through His body, which was just like yours and mine. Like the rest of His body, it was common to humanity.
Real blood from animals was evidence of their death as a sacrifice. They paid the death penalty as a substitute for people’s sins. That’s the background to the New Testament which shows Jesus as the ultimate sacrifice who paid the death penalty for us.
We have seen that the Israelites’ spiritual life was sustained by animal sacrifice, evidenced by their blood. This was a foretaste of the situation today where spiritual life begins with our acceptance of the death of Christ and is sustained by our ongoing appreciation of this by reading and meditating on Scripture.
Written, August 2016
After some Australian motorists drowned when their cars were swept away by floodwaters in June 2016, university researchers investigated how much force it takes to wash cars away from the road. A 1 tonne vehicle was moved by water 15 centimeters deep flowing at 3.6 km/hr. It was carried away in 60 centimeters of water. A 2.5 tonne vehicle was moved by 45 centimeters of water and began floating in 95 centimeters of water. The cars were moved so easily partly because even shallow water can be deceptively strong, and partly because modern cars are so air-tight that instead of taking on water they get pushed along by it. Even slow-moving water is powerful because water is heavy: each cubic metre weighs 1 tonne. They concluded that vehicles became vulnerable to moving floodwaters once the depth reached the floor of the vehicle. This is consistent with Queensland advice that “Water deeper than the bottom of your car door is enough to float your vehicle away, or splash the engine and cause it to stall”.
If a shallow river can be so powerful, a global flood would be an enormous catastrophic disaster. If this happened about 4,350 years ago, surely there would be some evidence of it still visible today. This blogpost is a summary of eight main points that were made by Dr Tasman Walker in a presentation on “Evidence of Noah’s flood in Australia”.
What would we expect to find on earth if there was a global flood as described in Genesis chapters 6-8 in the Bible?
Fractures in the earth’s crust
The two main sources of the water for the flood are described as “all the underground waters erupted from the earth, and the rain fell in mighty torrents from the sky” (Gen. 7:11-12NLT). Subterranean water burst from beneath the earth and there was torrential rain for 40 days. The flood waters rose to cover the highest mountains of the pre-flood world by 8 meters (Gen. 7:17-20). By the way, Mt Everest didn’t exist before the flood because there are sedimentary rocks with marine fossils on its summit.
If underground water was erupting from the earth on a global scale you would expect that the earth’s crust would be fractured. Today major fractures are seen in the earth’s crust around the edges of the continental plates. When these continental tectonic plates move against each other there are earthquakes and volcanic activity. Such geological activity around the Pacific Ocean is called the “ring of fire”.
So we would expect to find fractures in the earth’s crust and we do. These fractures are evidence of Noah’s flood.
Billions of dead things
If a catastrophic flood covered the earth for six months you would expect to find billions of dead things all over the earth. “Everything (except those on the ark) that breathed and lived on dry land died” (Gen. 7:22NLT). Because such a flood would transport huge amounts of sediment across the earth, most of the creatures that drowned would be buried in the sediments. Because such a flood would also transport huge amounts of sediment into the ocean and cause a depletion in oxygen levels, many marine creatures would die and be buried as well.
At Winton in Queensland, there are many well-preserved fossils of dinosaurs and marine creatures. Dinosaur fossils have also been found at Muttaburra (Queensland). These fossil-bearing sediments extend across the Great Artesian Basin into New South Wales, South Australia, and the Northern Territory, while marine fossils are found in other parts of Central Australia.
So we would expect to find billions of dead things (fossils) in sedimentary rocks and we do. These fossils are evidence of Noah’s flood.
Evidence of rapid burial
If a catastrophic flood covered the earth for six months you would expect to find evidence of rapid burial.
At Richmond in Queensland an exceptionally well-preserved marine reptile fossil was discovered in 1990. It’s a plesiosaur that’s over 4 meters long. In order to be preserved so well it must have been buried rapidly. Fossils of land animals are also found in this region, such as the ankylosaur (an armored dinosaur).
So we would expect to find evidence of rapid burial and we do. These fossils of creatures that were buried rapidly are evidence of Noah’s flood.
Sediment covering huge areas
If a catastrophic flood covered the earth for six months you would expect to find evidence of sediment covering huge areas.
Geologists find that layers of sedimentary rocks extend across large areas called sedimentary basins. They can contain coal, oil and gas that’s used as fossil fuels. For example, the Great Artesian Basin and the Sydney Basin. There are also examples in other continents. And there are also offshore sedimentary basins on the continental shelf of countries around the world.
So we would expect to find evidence of sediment covering huge areas and we do. These layers of sedimentary rock across huge areas are evidence of Noah’s flood.
Evidence of raging waters
If a catastrophic flood covered the earth for six months you would expect to find evidence of raging waters. As these flood waters would have been highly energetic, they would have transported material along with the flow.
The Three Sisters rock formation at Katoomba is composed of sandstone, which was laid down by water. This layer extends across the Sydney sedimentary basin. An examination of the sedimentary layers evident in road cuttings shows layers 1-2 meters thick, which indicates that a lot a water was involved in transporting and depositing this sediment. This water must have been continually rising (to enable continual deposition). There are many cross-beds that go at an angle across the strata. They are formed when the sediment layer builds sideways.
Uluru (Ayers Rock) in the Northern Territory is made of sandstone and the layers have been tipped up so they are almost vertical. These strata are visible as parallel lines on Uluru. This shows that there hasn’t been any significant erosion between the deposition of the strata. So there was rapid deposition – one layer was laid upon the other quite quickly. When we look at a geological cross-section through Uluru it is evident that a lot of sandstone has been eroded from above Uluru. The grains that comprise Uluru are angular, poorly sorted (a large range of particle sizes) and well-preserved (not weathered) which is consistent with rapid deposition.
Kata Tjuta (the Olgas) is a group of large, domed rock formations 25km west of Uluru. They are comprised of large boulders (30-50cm in size). These all face in a similar direction, which is the direction of the water flow that transported them to this site. They indicate highly energetic flood waters.
So we would expect to find evidence of raging waters (which transport and deposit lots of sediment) and we do. These cross-beds, parallel sedimentary strata and boulders are evidence of Noah’s flood.
Evidence of massive erosion
If a catastrophic flood covered the earth for six months you would expect to find evidence of massive erosion. After the flood waters peaked and subsided, they would have flowed off the continents and eroded material away as they flowed back into the ocean.
When you stand at Echo Point overlooking the Three Sisters, you see that Jamison valley is cut into a flat plateau. How did it get so flat? As the floodwaters moved across the continent, they eroded the surface flat. That’s how plateaus formed all around Australia and around the world. Jamison valley is much larger than any valley caused by Kedumba River that flows through it (the same is true for the Grand Canyon in USA). Geomorphologists call these overfit valleys – the valley is too big for the river. How did it get to be such a large valley? The valley was carved by a lot of water and not by the current river. As the floodwaters subsided, when hills became exposed, the water carved out large valleys transporting the sediment out of the area.
This is also evident at Carnarvon Gorge in Queensland at the intersection of the Great Artesian Basin and the Bowen Basin. A large valley has been cut into a sandstone plateau that’s capped by basalt. As material has been eroded away, these sedimentary layers originally covered a much larger area.
As a result of such erosion, rivers can flow through mountain ranges rather than around them. For example, the Heavitree Gap in the MacDonnell Ranges near Alice Springs. How did that happen? Many explanations have been proposed, but none of them work. As the floodwaters subsided, the higher parts of the ridge become exposed and the water flows between the gap between them. As the waters continue to drop, they continue to erode through this gap until when the water has all subsided the gap remains and a river flows through this gap today. It’s called an air gap if it doesn’t go down to the level of the adjacent surface.
So we would expect to find evidence of massive erosion and we do. These large overfit valleys are evidence of Noah’s flood.
Evidence of youthfulness
If a catastrophic flood covered the earth for six months about 4,350 years ago, you would expect to find evidence of youthfulness.
At Kata Tjuta there are a few boulders lying around, but not many. And there is a small apron around it, but not a large one as if it had been eroding for millions of years. And there’s very little debris around the base of Uluru or Kata Tjuta. This indicates that it was eroded recently.
So we would expect to find evidence of youthfulness and we do. The lack of erosional debris is evidence of Noah’s flood.
Worldwide memories of the flood
All of the people of the earth are descendants of the eight people on Noah’s ark. As the global flood occurred about 4,350 years ago, you would expect to find memories of Noah’s flood in the different people groups around the world.
Cultures around the world have flood legends (or stories). For example, the Bundaba Flood Story of the Aboriginals at Broome is given in the appendix. Common features in the stories are that there was a moral cause, people were drowned, there were people saved in a boat, and there was a bird.
So we would expect to find worldwide memories of the flood and we do. These flood stories are evidence of Noah’s flood.
There’s plenty of evidence in Australia of Noah’s flood. Evidence of eight aspects of Noah’s flood show that what we observe is consistent with what the Bible says. This flood is a key to connecting the Bible to the world around us. It explains the sedimentary rocks and the fossils. And it washes away the millions of years that are assumed by evolutionists.
It also helps us understand the world. It makes sense of biblical creation. Death and suffering came after Adam and Eve and not before them because they were a consequence of sin. Whereas according to the idea of evolution, death and suffering over millions of years brought about our existence.
Questions and answers
What is rapid burial?
When animals and fish die today they disintegrate and are recycled. They aren’t fossilized. So, how were the fossils preserved? If they are buried quickly it stops them being scavenged and it affects how bacteria destroys animal’s bodies. So rapid burial is necessary to produce fossils.
What about continental drift?
Like evolutionists, creationists fit the evidence into their world view. There is a creationist model of how the continents were all together before the flood and they broke apart during the flood (catastrophic plate tectonics). The earth’s mantle (beneath the earth’s crust) can suddenly lose its strength under high temperature and high pressure. So the continental movement could have happened very quickly (continental sprint) during Noah’s flood. In the second half of the flood the ocean basins sank and the continents rose: “Mountains rose and valleys sank to the levels you decreed” (Ps. 104:8NLT).
What does “the earth was divided” in the time of Peleg mean (Gen. 10:25)?
This is just before the tower of Babel when God divided the people into different language groups and they dispersed across the earth (Gen. 11:1-9). This is what we believe it means. It couldn’t be the separation of the continents because if it happened a few hundred years after the flood that would be a huge catastrophe and many people would perish and there is no evidence of this in Scripture.
When was Mt Everest formed?
The earth’s crust moved during the flood. The mountain ranges like Mt Everest were elevated towards the end of the flood. The mountians we see today rose up at this time. The shapes of the mountains were carved by the waters of the flood (and any post-flood ice).
Do we know how high the mountains were before the flood?
No. We know there were mountains before the Flood because the Bible speaks of them (Gen. 7:19-20). But we don’t know how high they were. Some creation geologists speculate that they weren’t as high as those today.
What about the ice age?
It happened after the flood. The flood is the only thing that explains the ice age. It was due to warm waters after the flood caused by the addition of hot subterranean water and by heat from volcanic activity. And large amounts of volcanic dust and aerosols in the atmosphere would have reflected solar radiation back into space causing low atmospheric temperatures. Warm oceans evaporate water, which then moves over the land. Cold air over the continents results in this water precipitating as snow. And the snow accumulates forming ice. Because the ice was not fully melted the following summer, the ice built up from year to year. It has been estimated that the ice accumulated for 500 years after the flood and then retreated to where it is today over another 200 years. But evolutionists don’t have an adequate explanation for the ice age.
What about global warming?
Climatic modelers try to include the ice age, but they don’t include Noah’s flood. They think that the earth’s atmosphere is unstable and a little change will tip it over the edge. Whereas the earth’s climate is very stable – after the huge climatic disturbance of the global flood, it took about 700 years to come back to equilibrium.
What about the decrease in longevity?
Before the flood people typically lived over 900 years. After the flood this decreased exponentially towards 100 years (David) and then 70 years. It was probably a genetic change and not an environmental one because after the flood Noah lived 350 years (Gen. 9:28) and Shem lived 500 years.
What about the Behemoth described in Job 40?
We believe it was a brachiosaur (sauropod) dinosaur. The size of its tail is one of the reasons. We believe that dinosaurs and people lived together. They were called dragons and other names because “dinosaur” is a modern name.
Appendix: The Bundaba Flood Story
Long, long ago there was a great flood. It happened because some children found the “winking” owl and plucked out all its feathers. The bird flew without wings, into the heavens and showed himself to Ngowungu, the Great Father. Ngowungu became very angry and decided to drown the people.
Later the people saw a small cloud rising which grew bigger and bigger till it spread all over the sky. The thunder began to roll and crash and the people were greatly afraid. With the rain and thunder was a terrible wind which broke great limbs off trees and rooted up others. During this terrible storm there was a noise above the awful crashes of thunder. This noise was coming from the north. The salt water, the sea, came pouring over the ranges from the north. The flood rose higher and higher till all the land was covered except the tops of two or three mountains.
A bird with a leaf in its mouth flew in front of them showing them the way to Mt. Broome. From further west a man and his wives with a dog were battling their way in a canoe when a bird with a leaf in its mouth flew in front of them showing them the way to Mt. Broome. They eventually reached Mt. Broome and landed there where some other survivors were.
Then Djabalgari, the great left-handed man incised his little finger and let the blood trickle down into the flood waters. The waters began to go down and eventually disappeared off the country. All other people were drowned.
Acknowledgement: This blogpost was sourced from a presentation by Dr Tas Walker (a geologist) on “Evidence of Noah’s flood in Australia”.
Written, July 2016
In March 2016 the NSW Environment Protection Authority served notice requiring a company to conduct a mandatory environmental audit of its waste oil processing facility near Maitland. This followed a pattern of environmental non-compliance at the facility, including serious breaches involving air emissions and water discharges. The audit of site practices and procedures includes assessment of testing waste products, operation and maintenance of pollution control equipment, bunding and spill management, and potential impacts on groundwater. In this post we carry out an audit of the naturalistic explanation of the origin of life.
In 1999 New Holland published a book, ‘In six days: why 50 scientists choose to believe in creation’. The editor, Dr John Aston, noted in the preface that:
‘Why would educated scientists still believe in creation? Why wouldn’t they prefer to believe in Darwinian evolution or even theistic evolution, where an all-powerful intelligence is seen as directing the evolutionary processes? Could scientists believe that life on earth is probably less than 10,000 years old? How would they deal with the evidence from the fossil record and the ages suggested by the radioactive dating of rocks as millions and billions of years old?’
‘During the past century, the biblical story of Genesis was relegated to the status of a religious myth and it was widely held that only those uneducated in science or scientific methods would seriously believe such a myth. However, my experience in organizing this book, is that there is a growing number of highly educated critically thinking scientists who have serious doubts about evidence for Darwinian evolution and who have chosen to believe in the biblical version of Creation.’
The scientists gave their personal response to the question: ‘Why do you believe in a literal six-day biblical Creation as the origin of life on earth?’ The responses were divided into two categories ‘Science and Origins’ (dealing with the scientific critique of evolution as well as the scientific basis for creation) and ‘Religion and Origins’ (dealing with a more philosophical approach to the question of evolution and creation). My contribution was in the latter section (p.322-327).
There are two main views about the origin of the universe and the origin of life: those based on naturalism and those based on an intelligent Creator. As these events occurred long ago and are not subject to direct observation or experimental tests, both of these perspectives are mainly philosophical beliefs based on certain assumptions about the physical world.
This fact is ignored or distorted in most modern treatments of the topic of origins. For example, the March 1998 issue of National Geographic included an article titled, ‘The rise of life on earth’. The editor of the magazine wrote concerning this article on the origin of life: ‘Science is the study of testable, observable phenomena’, and religious faith is ‘an unshakeable belief in the unseen’. This ‘straw man argument’ diverts the discussion away from the issues of science and logic to the separate topic of science versus religious faith. It also ignores the fact that there are no obvious ‘testable, observable phenomena’ on the origin of life. Furthermore, the language used in the article demonstrates that naturalism also relies on faith in the unseen.
The naturalistic view of origins is that everything that exists can be explained by physical and chemical processes alone. This differs from the view that matter, energy, physical and chemical processes and life were established by a Creator as revealed in the Holy Bible.
Searching for truth
An environmental auditor relies on two main factors: objective evidence and agreed standards. The outcome of each part of an audit depends on comparing the observable evidence against the relevant standard. Of course, environmental standards change in time and space across the world. Similarly, any explanation of origins should be consistent with the body of ‘observable evidence’ and any relevant ‘standards’. This is complicated by the fact that the evidence is viewed today, a long time after the beginning of the universe and life. Also, in a changing world, it is not immediately obvious which standards are relevant. The Bible is the only reliable and consistent source of truth; it is like a fixed frame of reference. Other authorities, such as science and logic, are not sufficient, as they may change in time and space; they are like a changing frame of reference.
The laws of physics and chemistry are examples of the relative standards of science, which change with time as knowledge develops. They were developed under present conditions and assume that the universe already exists. Two of these fundamental laws are that life always comes from earlier life and that mass/energy is conserved. Applying them to the origin of life assumes that all these conditions were true at that time. To say; then, that naturalism explains the origin of life is ‘circular reasoning’, as the outcome is largely determined by the assumptions made. Although these laws may describe the present world, it would be a gross assumption to extrapolate them back to the unobserved initial conditions. Yet this is done frequently by those with a naturalistic viewpoint, without acknowledgement of the uncertainties involved and the limitations of the scientific method.
The assumptions of both naturalism and biblical creation and the principles of the scientific method are stated clearly in W Gitt’s ‘Did God Use Evolution?’ 1993, CLV Christliche Literatur-Verbreitung e. V.
The Bible is a source of ‘absolute’ truth that has stood the test of time much longer than any other document or philosophy. Of course, as in the case of any literature, it requires interpretation as to what is historical and what is metaphorical or symbolic. Besides obvious literary techniques, the most reliable method is to use the whole message of the Bible to interpret any particular passage. Otherwise, an interpretation may not be consistent with the rest of the Bible.
The Bible contains three clear tests for determining whether a belief, teaching or philosophy is true or false. To be true it must pass each of the three tests:
The Jesus test: This test states that, ‘Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist … This is how we recognize the Spirit of truth and the spirit of falsehood’ (1 Jn. 4:2-6NIV). The question to be answered in this test is: What does it say about Jesus Christ? The Bible teaches that Christ was unique: divine and human, sinless, eternal and the Creator. It is false to deny that Christ was the divine Son of God. Beliefs that fail this test usually claim that Christ was, at best, a great teacher or a prophet. They may even encourage the view that Christ and other events in the Bible are mythical.
The gospel test: The Bible warns about those promoting a different gospel, ‘If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let them be under God’s curse!’ (Gal.1:9). The question to be answered in this test is: What is its gospel? In other words: what is the core belief or hope? The Bible says that the root cause of all our problems is that everyone has sinned and fallen short of God’s requirements—resulting in death. The only means of rescue is salvation by faith in Christ. ‘Different gospels’ are those that differ from this. They either add to it or take away from it. There is a warning against adding to or taking away from the words of the Bible (Rev. 22:18-19). Broader aspects of the gospel include the original creation and the ultimate restoration of all things (Rev. 4:11; 21:1-22:6). We need to be careful when applying this test because a ‘different gospel’ may deceive by using words similar to the true gospel but give them different meanings.
The fruit test: Jesus Christ warned, ‘Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. By their fruit you will recognize them’ (Mt. 7:15-20). The question to be answered in this test is: What kind of fruit is evident? In other words, what type of attitudes and behavior does it encourage? Is the divine nature or the sinful nature most evident? The former is characterised by the fruit of the Spirit: love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. The sinful nature may involve: idolatry, sexual immorality, selfish ambition, pride, hostility, quarrelling and outbursts of anger (Gal. 5:19-23).
These tests will now be used to assess the naturalistic view of origins.
The Jesus test: As naturalism means that nature is all there is, it is associated with atheism. For example, the American Association of Biology Teachers states, that; ‘The diversity of life on earth is the outcome of evolution: an unsupervised, impersonal, unpredictable and natural process of temporal descent with genetic modification that is affected by natural selection, chance, historical contingencies and changing environments.’
This view of origins has no need for a Creator or the divine, and so is consistent with a belief that Jesus Christ was only a human being and not divine. Naturalism clearly fails the Jesus test.
The gospel test: As naturalism assumes there is no God, it accepts no absolute standards of ‘right’ and ‘wrong’, and rejects the existence of ‘sin’ in the sense of falling short of God’s standard. Therefore, it teaches that there is no need of a savior. Its gospel is that nature has made itself and the Genesis account of origins is not true. A biblical consequence of this is that if there was no paradise at the beginning as described in Genesis, then there can be no hope for a future paradise (Acts 3:21). In fact, naturalism rejects all the basic biblical truths, such as: creation, the beginning of evil, the need for salvation and the ultimate destiny of human beings. So, naturalism fails the gospel test.
The fruit test: Naturalism supports and is associated with: materialism, humanism (humanity is self-sufficient, capable of solving all their difficulties) and pantheism (‘nature’ replaces God). Its acceptance leads to: less value on human life (practices such as abortion and euthanasia are more acceptable). Another example from the past is racism; less value on family life (biblical marriage is less important; divorce is more acceptable); less value on morals (truth is now relative, not absolute); a ‘might is right’ attitude that supports the strong, but not the weak (survival of the fittest; a competitive world; compassion involves saving ‘weak genes’). As these are opposite to the values of the Bible, naturalism fails the fruit test.
It is clear from this that the viewpoint of naturalism fails all the three biblical tests for determining what is true. Therefore, it is false and is not consistent with the overall message of the Bible.
Due to the influence of the above philosophies, claims are often made in the name of ‘science’ that go far beyond the available evidence, and some aspects of modern science have become increasingly tenuous and speculative. In fact, the everyday use of the word ‘science’ has changed from dealing with things that are observable and testable to meaning ‘naturalism’ and so includes conjecture and dubious hypotheses.
Although we live in a ‘cause-and-effect’ universe, ultimate causes, such as origins, are outside the realm of reliable science. Science can only reliably deal with the present world; it cannot reliably deal with the past (such as origins) or the future (such as ultimate destinies), as it cannot directly observe these. I believe all scientists should be wary of their assumptions, as these can largely determine their findings. They should also be wary of extrapolations outside the range of observation. The further the extrapolation, the less reliable the prediction. Changes in the assumptions will change the prediction. This applies in particular to boundary conditions, such as those involving initial conditions (or origins). Therefore, scientists can only speculate, imagine and guess about the origin of life.
Dr Hawke is a Senior Environmental Consultant with an electricity supply company in Sydney, Australia. He holds a BSc with first class honors in Physics from the University of Sydney, and PhD in Air Pollution Meteorology from Macquarie University. Over the past 22 years, Dr Hawke has worked as an environmental scientist and environmental consultant for a state government regulatory authority and the electrical power industry. He is also a Certified Environmental Auditor with the Quality Society of Australasia.
Published in 1999
Today there is a national election in Australia. Key election issues include: the economy, jobs, health, education and the environment. The political parties seeking election included the Greens, the Renewable Energy Party, the Animal Justice Party, and the Sustainable Australia Party. This post looks at the foundation of the ethics and morals of the environmental movement.
I gave this message at a conference in 1998. It’s based on the situation over 18 years ago. Although the examples are now historical, most modern examples would be similar in many ways. Many people are still concerned about the natural environment.
Concern for the environment and pollution affects us all: we see and hear about it in the daily news media, it’s taught at all levels of education, it affects all businesses in some way, governments pass more and more laws about it, and in 1996, the first national “State of the Environment” report said that, “Australians are among the most environmentally aware people in the world”.
My background is in science (physics and mathematics) and environmental science. I am a certified environmental auditor, who audits environmental management systems for industry and businesses. In this message I will present the results of an audit of the foundations the environmental movement and of modern science. So we are looking at basic beliefs, values, viewpoints and assumptions. The findings will be compared to the Bible, which I believe is God’s guidebook for humanity.
Environmentalism involves concern for the physical world, such as advocating protection and conservation of the natural environment. It’s a complex and recent subject that has developed over the past 30 years.
Model of aspects of environmentalism
A schematic diagram of aspects of environmentalism provides a framework for this message. The two main aspects of environmentalism are the principles, which are what we believe, and the practices, which are what we do. Our principles (assumptions and values) have a strong influence on our behavior. That’s why they are sometimes called “guiding principles”. This message is focused on the principles that can drive environmentalism.
According to the Bruntland Report, “Our common future” (1987), “to achieve the goals of sustainable development, good environment, and decent standards of life for all involves very large changes in attitude”. Where do these attitudes come from? Our minds. If we are consistent, they are the principles that drive our practices. For example, if we believed in the golden rule (treat others as we would like them to treat us), then we would help others. Or, if we are selfish, we may ignore others or exploit them. But other things besides our principles can influence our behavior.
The schematic diagram shows how our assumptions and circumstances can also influence our behavior. For example, in the case of global warming; the principles are our worldview, values and ethics; the science is the mathematical models that predict temperatures and sea levels; the assumptions are those made in the scientific predictions; the circumstances are the technology available and the particular situation in each nation; and the practices are what each nation does in response to this issue.
In environmental auditing we begin by checking compliance with the organisation’s environmental policy because it contains their guiding principles, including philosophy, values, and ethics.
This message is focused on the principles of environmentalism and the assumptions of science. What are they? And, how do they compare with the Bible?
Principles of environmentalism
Environmentalism is based on a viewpoint that nature should be valued and protected. This is a pro-environment/conservation world view. Many world views have been explored in attempts to develop an ethical basis for environmentalism. There is range of viewpoints and philosophies within the environmental movement which overlap and can lead to conflicts. The three main categories of principles are based on the three main parts of our world. They are: human-centered, nature-centered, and God-centered.
Nature is our life support system; we depend on it for survival. So people have a self-interest in the preservation of their environments. It’s important because of its impact on people. For example, ozone depletion in the upper atmosphere can increase risk of skin cancer. So we want to protect stratospheric ozone.
The two main ideas in this approach are conservation and preservation. Nature is a resource that needs to be conserved for human needs. So, Government Forestry Services manage forests to maintain productivity. Nature also needs to be protected for the enjoyment of all people. For example, zoos and nature parks.
Sometimes people can have a negative impact on the environment. For example, the exploitation of nature without consideration for sustainability.
This introduces the idea that nature has intrinsic value – it should be preserved unless it conflicts with something of greater value. In this category we will look at two approaches: species centered and ecosystem centered.
The first approach says that species have rights or intrinsic value. For example, animal rights are promoted – as they have a value of their own, we should seek to minimise our impact on animals. This can lead to treating other species as though they were human. Stephen Gould advocates applying the golden rule to nature and the environment, “Do to others as you would have them do to you” (Lk. 6:31NIV). Similar rules exist in other religions as well. This means treating nature as we would want to be treated. But try applying this to an ant! It would be difficult avoiding killing an ant as we walk around.
The second approach acts for the good of all nature, not just human interests. This is more holistic as it involves the whole ecosystem/biosphere. This can lead to reverence for nature and wilderness, such as deep ecology. Here all natural things (ecosystems, life, landscape) have an intrinsic right to exist and there is a feeling of being connected with nature. This in turn can lead to Gaia theory (which is named after the ancient Greek earth goddess), where the earth is viewed as a single organism, like a living thing. It claims that evolution is not random, but is directed by Gaia.
These modern ideas are similar to ancient ones where nature has a spirituality. Animism is the belief that all natural objects and the universe possesses a soul. And pantheism is the belief that: God is not a personality, but a force; the universe exists of itself; all natural happenings are God, and that God is everything and everything is God; and Mother Nature replaces God.
Examples of these principles of environmentalism are given in the Appendix 1.
Problems with these principles of environmentalism
Human-centered environmentalism is not sufficient, as it omits much of the ecosphere. So most environmentalists have stopped using this approach.
Nature-centered environmentalism also has limitations, particularly with regard to species rights, sanctity of life and intrinsic value. For example: How can we determine priority between species? Is there a hierarchy of rights? Catastrophes (e.g. fires, droughts, storms, volcanic eruptions, earthquakes) that kill huge numbers of organisms are a part of nature. So nature can be destructive. It does not act as a perfect God, unless you believe in a God who can be evil. As species are interdependent (can be linked by a chain of dependence), this leads to saying that “all aspects of nature have intrinsic value” – but it is impossible to preserve everything. And it doesn’t help to solve day-to-day environmental problems.
We now turn to the Biblical viewpoint of the physical environment (values, principles, truths). We need to realize that the Bible contains basic principles which can be applied to all areas of our life. It contains God’s plans for the natural world (its history and its destiny) and how He intends us to live in it.
We will look at three Biblical principles here: creation, the gospel, and stewardship.
Doctrine of creation
This has two parts: God as creator, and God as sustainer. First, God created everything. “God made the world and everything in it” (Acts 17:24-28). “By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God’s command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible” (Heb. 11:3). So God is the sole source of all that exists. “Everything God created is good” (1 Tim. 4:4). Jesus is “the author of life” (Acts 3:15), “He made the universe” (Heb. 1:2). “All things were created through Him and for Him” (Col. 1:16). “God saw all that He had made, and it was very good” (Gen 1:31) – Eden was paradise.
Creation is separate to the Creator. “They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshipped and served created things rather than the Creator” (Rom 1:25).
God owns creation. “The earth is the Lord’s, and everything in it, the world, and all who live in it” (Ps. 24:1).
The awe and beauty of nature. “For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities–His eternal power and divine nature–have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse” (Rom. 1:20).
The relationship between God, people and nature can be summarized as follows. God is infinite and personal. People are finite and personal. Animals, plants and machines are finite and impersonal. So humanity has special value, we share personality with God. We were made in God’s image, and people still have some of God’s image (Gen 9:6). Also, God came to earth as a man. So the Bible says that humans are both a part of nature (but not on the basis of biological unity), and apart from nature (like God). Nature is not our Mother, it is our brother and sister (as we are both created things).
“For this is what the LORD says– He who created the heavens, He is God; He who fashioned and made the earth, He founded it; He did not create it to be empty, but formed it to be inhabited” (Isa 45:18). So, creation has value because God made it and owns it.
Second, God sustains everything.
Jesus – “sustaining all things by His powerful word” (Heb. 1:3). “In Him all things hold together” (Col. 1:17). “in Him we live and move and have our being” (Acts 17:28). “Nothing in all creation is hidden from God’s sight” (Heb. 4:13). So the bible teaches that God sustains natural processes. The creation is dependent on the Creator for its continuing existence.
This includes the forces that hold things together (such as nuclear forces and gravity). Without Him all things would fly apart! God also cares for birds and vegetation. “Look at the birds of the air; they do not sow or reap or store away in barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not much more valuable than they?” (Mt. 6:26). “And why do you worry about clothes? See how the flowers of the field grow. They do not labor or spin.” (Mt.6:28). “If that is how God clothes the grass of the field, which is here today and tomorrow is thrown into the fire, will He not much more clothe you – you of little faith?” (Mt. 6:30).
We can view God’s power and presence in nature, like electricity flows through a wire. The wire is not the electricity, but it can be the vehicle through which the electricity flows. God is not nature and nature is not God. To think that would be a to think like a pantheist and not a Christian. But in this sense, God is in nature.
“Your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you … Therefore, honor God with your bodies” (1 Cor. 6:19-20). Our bodies and senses should be used and appreciated for God. Similarly, all creation has been made by God and He sustains it, therefore, honor God as you interact and appreciate the physical world.
“Do not offer any part of yourself to sin, as an instrument of wickedness, but rather offer yourselves to God, as those who have been brought from death to life; and offer every part of yourself to Him as an instrument of righteousness” (Rom. 6:13). So the body and the physical world can be viewed as an instrument (or tool) which can be used for good or bad. We should honor God in our way of living in the material world – and work out what this means in the various areas of our life.
The gospel is the good news, that addresses the bad news. God created a perfect universe, but because of the fall into sin when Adam and Eve disobeyed God, the universe is now flawed. To fix the situation, God sent Jesus to enable redemption and restoration. Those who accept what Jesus did are promised eternal life in the new heaven and new earth, while those who reject it face eternal punishment.
The fall into sin led to suffering, decay and death (Gen. 3; Rom. 8). Genesis 3 is one of the most important chapters in the Bible. God cursed not only people, but also nature, because of human sin. It explains the problem of evil in our world, in both humanity and in nature. It’s the ultimate cause of environmental problems. We live in a fallen world, different to the original condition of “very good”. Nature is abnormal, and it can be destructive. Environmentalist try to stop death in the environment. The fall explains death.
Now looking at redemption and restoration. Christians are seen as being part of a new creation, “Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, the new creation has come: the old has gone, the new is here!” (2 Cor. 5:17). Through Jesus, people can be reconciled to God. The biblical visions of the kingdom of God are visions of people in harmony with nature. The Bible teaches that the effects of the curse on nature will end and nature will be restored to its original splendor (it will be a sinless, deathless paradise, reconciled to God). Nature will also enjoy with Christians the effects of redemption.
“I consider that our present sufferings are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us. The creation waits in eager expectation for the children of God to be revealed. For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the freedom and glory of the children of God.
We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption to sonship, the redemption of our bodies. For in this hope we were saved. But hope that is seen is no hope at all. Who hopes for what they already have? But if we hope for what we do not yet have, we wait for it patiently” (Rom. 8:18-25). So all of creation is looking for redemption by God; not by people like us.
Christians share the gospel message with many people, even though they know that probably only a few will respond. Likewise, Christians ought to be willing to care for the created world, even though they know that they can’t bring full restoration.
Our bodies and the physical world will be transformed one day (like Jesus after His resurrection). The restoration will be through Jesus; “to reconcile to Himself (God) all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven” (Col. 1:20). “Heaven must receive Him (Christ) until the time comes for God to restore everything, as He promised long ago through His holy prophets” (Acts 3:21). When God judges the ungodly, the earth will be destroyed by fire and replaced by a new heaven and a new earth (2 Pt. 3:7-13). And we “are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, where righteousness dwells”.
God will then live with mankind as in the Garden of Eden, “There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away” (Rev. 21:1-8).
Doctrine of Stewardship
God told Adam and Eve, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground” (Gen 1:28). “Subdue” (“kabask” in Hebrew) means to conquer. “Rule” (“radah” in Hebrew) is generally used to describe the righteous and loving rule of a good and kind king. For example, King Solomon “ruled over all the kingdoms west of the Euphrates River, from Tiphsah to Gaza, and had peace on all sides. During Solomon’s lifetime Judah and Israel, from Dan to Beersheba, lived in safety, everyone under their own vine and under their own fig tree” (1 Ki. 4:24-25).
God told Adam how this rule is to be carried out. “The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work (“abad” in Hebrew) it and take care (“shama” in Hebrew) of it” (Gen. 2:15). Elsewhere “abad” is translated to “serve” (e.g. “we will serve the Lord”, Josh. 24:15) and “sharma” is translated to “keep”, “watch” or “preserve” (e.g. “The Lord bless you and keep you”, Num. 6:24). God keeps His people in such a way to demonstrate His great love and care. All this was given before the fall of man, so there is no suggestion of evil or exploitation of nature here. So, Adam managed the garden of Eden. Before the fall there was perfect harmony between humanity and the environment.
As God owns the world, Christians can be seen as His stewards (or managers, a delegated authority). A “steward” is a manager of a household (e.g. Lk. 16:1-9). Peter also used it as a metaphor for believers, “Each of you should use whatever gift you have received to serve others, as faithful stewards of God’s grace in its various forms” (1 Pt. 4:10).
Stewardship means caring for creation as God would. And we are accountable to God. For example, in the Old Testament there was a Sabbath rest for animals and a Sabbath year rest for agricultural land (Ex. 20:10; 23:10-11).
The assumptions of modern science
Science provides a useful method for finding out things about the way the world works. The assumptions and boundaries of “science” largely determine the findings of science. Only theories consistent with these are acceptable to science. We will look at three major assumptions of science.
Doctrine of Naturalism
Science assumes a naturalistic world where the physical universe is all that exists. Nature is all there is. So, everything is explained in terms of mechanical processes. God only exists as an idea in the minds of religious believers. Naturalism is associated with: materialism -there is only matter (no unseen world of souls, spirits or deities) and atheism – there is no God. This limits science to naturalistic theories. As science excludes the supernatural (by definition), a model or explanation that incorporates supernatural intervention (e.g. creative intelligence), cannot be called “scientific”. Therefore, “Creation science” is impossible. As a result, science is unable to disprove the spiritual, as whatever it discovers is “natural” by definition.
Doctrine of Evolution
Science assumes an evolving world (mainly because the only alternative is an act of creation by a God). Mutation and selection are assumed to be the driving forces of evolution. As naturalism and evolution are assumptions of science, science cannot be used to prove these.
Examples of these doctrines of science are given in the Appendix 2.
Doctrine of Uniformity
Science usually assumes the present is the key to the past and the future. Sometimes there is immense extrapolation into the past (e.g. speculation on the origin of life) and into the future (e.g. speculation on global warming), without proper consideration of assumptions and uncertainty. I call this speculative science. It fails to recognize that many deep questions are unanswered and will probably never be definitively answered, given the limits of science. For example, how was the universe created?
Consequences for Christianity
Once science was based on what was able to be observed, repeated and tested. But these assumptions have been added in such a way that anything outside this scope is deemed to be unscientific and false. When applied to situations outside the scope of observational science, this approach renders all other viewpoints false. For example, it means that there is no need to prove that evolution happened. Instead they just say that it happened with no need for a rigorous proof. In this way, science has used evolution to destroy Christianity. This is explained below.
Biblical viewpoint of evolution
Putting the doctrine of evolution (one of the assumptions of modern science) to the test. The Bible contains three clear tests for determining what is true and false:
The Jesus test: Who was Jesus Christ?
“This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God …. This is how we recognize the Spirit of truth and the spirit of falsehood” (1 Jn. 4:2-6).
The gospel test: Is it a different gospel?
“I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel–which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let them be under God’s curse!” (Gal. 1:6-8).
The fruit test: What kind of fruit is evident?
“Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. … Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them” (Mt. 7:15-20).
Here’s how evolution goes in these tests.
The Jesus test
According to evolution, there is no need for a Savior. Jesus was only a human being, not divine. He was not the Creator (as there is no need for one), or the “second Adam”, as there was no Adam who disobeyed God in the first place. So, it fails the Jesus test.
The gospel test
The gospel according to evolution is compared with the gospel according to the Bible in the schematic diagram. This shows they are totally different. And evolution undermines all aspects of the gospel – all basic Biblical truths.
Evolution provides a new creation story, “As a story of creation, the book of Genesis long ago crumbled under the weight of science, notably Darwin’s theory of natural selection“ (Time, 4 Nov. 1996, p80).
If evolution is true, then death and suffering is not the result of sin. “According to Genesis, nature is in essence benign … But according to Darwinism, the evil in nature lies at its very roots, instilled by its creator, natural selection” (Time, 4 Nov. 1996, p81). The biological roots of sin are attributed to impulses that arose by natural selection and that were then inherited as they enhanced the chances of survival and reproduction. This means that sin, death and suffering are an inherent part of nature from the beginning of time.
So there is no need for a Savior and heaven and hell don’t exist. Its message is that “salvation comes through science”.
The fruit test – the fruits of evolution
The idea of evolution supports and is associated with: naturalism, materialism, atheism, humanism (humanity is self-sufficient; capable of solving all his difficulties), and pantheism.
Acceptance of the idea of evolution leads to the following:
Less value on human life (practices such as abortion and euthanasia are more acceptable). Another example from the past is racism (e.g. Australian Aboriginals were considered to be biologically inferior to Europeans. This was justified by biological determinism promoted by evolutionary anthropology).
Less value on family life (marriage less important, divorce is more acceptable)
Less value on morals (truth is now relative, not absolute).
A “might is right” attitude, which supports the strong, but not the weak (survival of the fittest, a competitive world, compassion involves saving “weak genes”).
These are fruits of the sinful nature, not the divine nature. So the doctrine of evolution is a major cause behind many of the problems in our society.
Results of the tests
So the “doctrine of evolution” fails all three Biblical tests. This means it’s a false doctrine, an idol, the creation story and religion of modern science.
Secular environmentalism represents a new religion (see schematic diagram). By trying to introduce ethics and morals into a world that has discarded the Bible, most environmentalists adopt ethics which are centered on humanity or nature and they follow the idols of: humanism, atheism or pantheism. These are all justified by belief in evolution (which is also an idol). Idolatry is following ideas that replace the Creator God. Although they claim to be wise, such environmentalists are foolish because their actions are based on a lie (a false idea) (Rom. 1:22, 25). Due to the influence of these philosophies, claims are often made in the name of science that go far beyond the available evidence.
But the Bible gives us a God-centered view of the world, it reveals the Creator, and gives us responsibility to care for the creation as God’s stewards. Biblical environmentalism (see schematic diagram) can be based on Biblical principles and assumptions. The principles include: creation, sustenance, the fall (these three show that in some respects, the past is the key to the present), redemption, restoration and stewardship. Besides the natural world, this assumes the supernatural (there is more than the physical world), special creation (which can’t be explained by current laws), and possible catastrophes (so we need to be careful when extrapolating). Let’s care for creation as God’s stewards (or managers).
Examples of principles of environmentalism
The Rio declaration on Environment and development (1992) has 27 principles, including:
Principle 1 “Human beings are at the center of concerns for sustainable development. They are entitled to a healthy and productive life in harmony with nature” – Human centered
Principle 3 “The right to development must be fulfilled so as to equitably meet development and environmental needs of present and future generations” – Human centered
Principle 7 “States shall cooperate in a spirit of global partnership to conserve, protect and restore the health and integrity of the earth’s ecosystem” – Ecosystem centered
Agenda 21 is the program to implement the Rio declaration. It proposes a program for action for sustainable development. Its Preamble says:
“Humanity stands at a defining moment in history. We are confronted with a perpetuation of disparities between and within nations, a worsening of poverty, hunger, ill health and illiteracy, and the continuing deterioration of the ecosystems on which we depend for our well-being. However, integration of environment and development concerns and greater attention to them will lead to the fulfilment of basic needs, improved living standards for all, better protected and managed ecosystems and a safer, more prosperous future” – Human centered
The National “State of the Environment” report says, “Preserving Australia’s biodiversity is important for four reasons”. One of these is Ethics which means that “no species and no generation has the right to remove earth’s resources solely for its own benefit” – Nature centered
The objectives of the NSW EPA include:
“reduce the risks to human health and prevent the degradation of the environment” – Human centered, and “achieve Ecologically Sustainable Development by implementing: the precautionary principle (being cautious), intergenerational equity (protect the environment for future generations)” – Human centered, “conservation of biological diversity & ecological integrity” – Species & ecosystem centered and “improved valuation & pricing of environmental resources” (using economics).
Greenpeace’s philosophy is:
“Ecology teaches us that humankind is not the center of life on the planet. Ecology has taught us that the whole earth is part of our body, and that we must learn to respect it as we respect ourselves. As we feel for ourselves, we must feel for all forms of life – the whales, the seals, the forests, the seas. The tremendous beauty of ecological thought is that it shows us a pathway back to an understanding and an appreciation of life itself – and understanding and appreciation that is imperative to that very way of life” – Ecosystem centered, leading to pantheism.
The Australian Conservation Foundation Mission is loaded with evolutionary assumptions:
“The conservation ethic reveres the enormous sweep and splendor of life, through three million millennia of geological time and its spread into many millions of diverse species and habitats. It is conscious that Homo sapiens is but a relative newcomer. From this perspective, it seeks to approach other species and their environments with humility and without arrogance” – Nature centered, reveres evolution
“It seeks to sustain diverse and active living communities in which non-human life can resume, in comparative tranquillity, the ponderous process of evolution which has been so disrupted and confused by the interruption of man” – Nature centered
“Intrinsic to the ethic is the recognition that human life is an integral part of this slow, inexorable and continuing evolutionary process; that our own adaption results from it and our destiny is tied to its continuance; our genes carry chemical messages shared with many other species now living and with many progenitors extending back to the beginning of life. Consequently, conformity with the conservation ethic confers benefits on humanity in terms of greater efficiency and satisfaction in meeting basic human needs and producing more resilient, supportive and fulfilling communities” – link to Human centered via evolution
“Against these threats, conservation seeks to hold the earth in trust for future generations, both human and non-human” – Ecosystem centered,
The UN Environment Program: “Caring for natural resources and promoting their sustainable use is an essential response of the world community to ensure its own survival and well-being” – Human centered
The Director General of UNESCO: “Unlike modern industrial society, many traditional cultures promote not only the need but the sacred duty for people to live in symbiosis with their natural environment … Our greatest need at the present time is perhaps for a global ethic – transcending all other systems of allegiance and belief – rooted in the consciousness of the interrelatedness and sanctify of all life. Such an ethic would tamper humanities acquired knowledge and power with wisdom of the kind found at the heart of the most ancient human traditions and cultures – in Taoism and Zen (Buddhist), in the understandings of the Hopi and the Maya Indians, in the Vedas (Hindu scripture) and the Psalms, in the very origins of human culture itself” – Ecosystem centered, leading to pantheism & other religions
“The theme of Theodore Roszak’s book The Voice of the Earth is our relationship to the natural world … He proposes a new relationship to nature, one based on modern science which regards the world as a living organism, a dynamic system with the capacity to self-regulate … possible solutions which Roszak envisions in an ecologically-grounded form of animism … The motivation for change on a planetary level must rise from deep within. This is where we must hear the voice of the earth, as she expresses herself through us as a genuine person need for a new quality of life. Her voice can bring us in contact with the ecological unconscious, the parts of the soul that we have lost touch with. What are needed are ‘ecological goals that can heal the psyche, psychological values that can heal the planet’” (Habitat May 94, p53) – Pantheism
Examples the doctrines of science (in the field of ecology)
“Nature in its infinite wisdom gave our animals soft feet so they would be gentle on Australia’s fragile soils” (Habitat, Dec 96, p5).
“Throughout evolution, only two kinds of eyes have ever been invented. One is the vertebrate eye, which works like a single-lens camera; the other is the compound eye of insects and crustaceans” (NA, Winter 97, p34).
“Some animals have evolved to look like other animals or even plants, thereby reducing predator pressure” (NA, Autumn 96, p8).
“We’re the dominant species on the planet; at the top of the food chain; at the top of the evolutionary tree. The way we got there is by being incredibly ruthless and self-centered” (NA, Autumn 96, p47).
“Frogs worldwide have evolved almost 30 different ways of reproducing” (NA, Summer 94-95, p64).
“As a group, spiders have developed an astounding array of techniques to capture and immobilize their prey” (NA, Spring 94, p17).
“The ‘apeman’ – australopithecines – did not die out. We are those apemen, just as living apes are members of the group from which they descended. In the same way, dinosaurs didn’t die out – they are still alive and kicking as birds. All that’s happened is an evolutionary change through time in the shape of the creatures in these long-lasting lineages” (NA, Winter 94, p68).
An academic – Judith Kinnear (Sydney University Gazette, Apr 96, p25)
“The Darwinian model of evolution by natural selection enriches many of my everyday experiences: my walks in the Australian bush make me ponder a unique flora that evolved after the break-up of the Gondwana super-continent; my visits to the zoo reveal the living products of divergent evolution that fall into an orderly pattern; my viewing of a TV program on the appearance of antibiotic resistance in harmless bacteria transforming them into untreatable killers reminds me of the ongoing impact of evolutionary forces”. This shows that the doctrine of evolution is now embedded in our society. Everyone is indoctrinated in it so that it’s a worldview or paradigm and like a religion.
Written, January 1998; Posted, July 2016
Also see: Recognizing false teachers