Jonah—An Early Environmentalist – “…environmentalism today stems, not from real scientific evidence that man is harming the planet, but from a warped sense of value. ”
by Bill Lockwood
At first, Jonah refused the trek to Nineveh. The pulpit of the Assyrian capital had no appeal. The historical account, however, demonstrates that one cannot run from God, as Jonah attempted. After being “vomited out upon the dry land” the prophet traveled to the country of his enemies to preach repentance: “Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown!” The residents believed God. “And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God relented of the evil which he said he would do unto them, and he did it not.”
With these great results Jonah was not happy. God was too merciful to his taste. “I knew thee, that thou art a gracious God, and merciful, slow to anger, and abundant in lovingkindness, and repent thee of the evil,” the prophet complained.
God’s corrective to this sour disposition then involved a “gourd” which grew up over the prophet’s head to shade him as he sat on the east side of the city to see what would become of her. Jonah was glad because of the temporary reprieve from the sun’s direct rays. However, overnight God caused the gourd to wither leaving exposed Jonah’s unprotected head.
God showed him, “You have had regard for the gourd, for which you have not labored, neither made to grow; which came up in a night and perished in a night; and should I not have regard for Nineveh, the great city, wherein are ore than 600,000 persons?”
Needless to say, Jonah’s system of values was skewed. His consideration leaned heavily for the plant—and his own selfish interests—against the lives and souls of men. As with Jonah, so with myriads of loose thinkers today who are not hesitant to “protect” the inanimate environment to the detriment and at the expense of man. Most environmentalism today stems, not from real scientific evidence that man is harming the planet, but from a warped sense of value. Jonah’s belief system fits perfectly into the modern environmental movement.
Are Not Ye of Much More Value Than They?
Jesus taught that God cares for all creation. However, there is an order of value. “Behold the birds of the heaven, that they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are not you of much more value than they?” The answer is a self-evident “Yes”—but not to modern self-appointed care-takers of the Earth. “Absolutely not!” is their resounding reply.
Environmental theorist Lynn White, Jr. wrote, “We shall to have a worsening ecological crisis until we reject the Christian axiom that nature has no reason for existence save to serve man.” White is casting down the Genesis account that man was created to exercise “dominion” over the Earth all all its living creatures, being instructed to “subdue” the creation.
The Environmental Conservation Organization, Inc. published an article years ago (1996) the title of which says it all. “Redefining American Values.” Instead of a foundation of “life, liberty, and property” as is written in our American founding documents reflecting a God-centered world view, the ECO champions a “planned process of redefinition.” This has almost been completed by the Green Regime.
The ECO reports that “In a generation, anthropocentrism [man-centered] has been denounced as the cause of most of the world’s problems, and life, as a value, has been redefined. The new definition of life, the first and highest value to be protected, is all life forms, of which human life is but one strand with no more value than any other life form. This belief is described as ‘biocentrism,’ or ‘nature-centered.’” This is what might be called “The New Earth Ethic.”
Maurice Strong, billionaire Canadian environmentalist, announced at the 1992 UN Earth Summit: “It is the responsibility of each being today to choose between the force of darkness and the force of light. We must therefore transform our attitudes, and adopt a renewed respect for the superior laws of Divine Nature.”
Strong’s Earth Religion is reflected by Robert Muller, the former Assistant Secretary-General of the United Nations. In his New Genesis: Shaping Our Global Spirituality he referred to “our brethren the animals, our sisters the flowers.” Time magazine even classified the environmental movement as “part of a growing US Spiritual Movement.”
The New Earth Religion is complete with goddess worship (Gaia), concepts of sin, holy days, hymns, sacred writings, atonement, indulgences, and many other religious doctrines. These are well-documented in a recent article appearing in The New American (4-17-17) authored by John T. Larabell. Topping off the religious nature of the Green Movement is the UN’s “Ark of Hope.” According to arkofhope.org the sanctuary of the UN contains this wooden chest that was constructed in 2001 to mimic Israel’s Old Testament “Ark of the Covenant.”
In sum, the Green Religion, which seems to be engulfing masses of ill-informed citizens on the globe, preaches a tainted value-system which reflects Jonah of old. Christian axioms regarding the value of human life are being replaced by a new Earth first paganistic view in which humanity itself is seen as a plague to be eliminated. Shades of Jonah!