Wednesday, April 4, 2007

Pagans vs. Christians, the sequel

"We have received from Divine Providence the supreme favour of being relieved from all error."

This could easily be the motto of climatologists engaged in forecasting the alleged affects of global warming. (Actually, it is Constantine in a letter to the Church of Alexandria.)

I have asserted on many occasions that environmentalism is a religion. There is one important distinction which is that environmentalism is a pagan religion. This is important because there is a direct parallel between philosophy and religion today and events in Ancient Rome which ultimately led to her downfall and the onset of a thousand years of hell on earth known as the Dark Ages.

To paraphrase Dr. John Lewis' lecture "Ideas and the Fall of Rome", the pagan's of Ancient Rome are today's left and the burgeoning Christians of Ancient Rome are today's religious right. Then as now, both sides are fundamentally the same in principle. They both accept the supernatural and a similar code of ethics and only differ on the minutia. In other words, both sides accept the Platonic concept of a perfect, supernatural world of which reality is only an imperfect reflection continually sullied by Man's base desires and flawed existence. Their idealism consists of sacrifice to the god(s) thereby attaining or aspiring to perfection either in this life (mostly pagan) or in the afterlife (mostly Christian).

Environmentalists idealise ascetism in order to not corrupt or defile the earth while Christians idealise ascetism (see the various Saints) as a means of living a more "godly" life. For example, environmentalist sacrifices might consist of of going without toilet paper for a year (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/22/garden/22impact.html?ex=1332216000&en=e77725051fe1a853&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss) , refraining from using man made energy, preventing development for human habitation, roads, or businesses, etc. while Christian sacrifices have more to do with roaming in the desert (Saint Anthony), sleeping on rocks, celibacy, etc.

So, the object, purpose, and nature of their sacrifices are slightly different but they both uphold sacrifice as the good.

The environmentalist god is "Gaia" or mother earth which was actually among the first pagan gods not only in antiquity but the object of some of the first known religious cave paintings dating from 60,000-70,000 years ago.

Referring to environmentalism as a "re-mapping" of judeo-christian beliefs, Michael Chrichton said:
There's an initial Eden, a paradise, a state of grace and unity with nature, there's a fall from grace into a state of pollution as a result of eating from the tree of knowledge, and as a result of our actions there is a judgment day coming for us all. We are all energy sinners, doomed to die, unless we seek salvation, which is now called sustainability.

Let's add to this. As George Reisman pointed out:
It is customary for old-fashioned religion to threaten those whose way of life is not to its satisfaction, with the prospect of hell in the afterlife. Substitute for the afterlife, life on earth in centuries to come, and it is possible to see that environmentalism and the rest of the left are now doing essentially the same thing. They hate the American way of life because of its comfort and luxury, which they contemptuously dismiss as “conspicuous consumption.” And to frighten people into abandoning it, they are threatening them with a global-warming version of hell.

Hell is the environmentalists’ ultimate threat... literally to roast and boil the earth.

So, let's think of the above as the Environmentalist Old Testament (creation, original sin, the Law, hell, etc.).

Moving into the New Testament, I submit that Rachel Carson is the environmentalist Jesus and Al Gore is their Apostle Paul . Rachel Carson was the original "bringer" of environmentalist truth and Gore is the unoriginal yet most notable missionary in early environmentalism.

Furthermore, I submit that the recent UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is the environmentalist version of the First Council of Nicaea from AD 325 which:
was the first ecumenical conference of bishops of the Catholic Church, and most significantly resulted in the first uniform Christian doctrine, called the Nicene Creed. With the creation of the creed, a precedent was established for subsequent 'general ecumenical councils of Bishops' Synods to create statements of belief and canons of doctrinal orthodoxy— the intent being to define unity of beliefs for the whole of Christendom.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea)

This conference brought together the world's leading "experts" and is to said to have once and for all unequivocally determined that man is the real global warming sinner and doomed to a literal hell on earth if not stopped.

Why is it important to make such identifications? By understanding the relationship of today's ideological movements, we can look to history's "vast pallete of human events..." "To understand the future we must understand what people have thought, and done, in the past, and why. When we learn about history we can understand not only that things happen, but also why they happen, and why they will, or will not, continue to happen." (http://www.classicalideals.com/)

So what happened with the pagans and the Christians anyway and is there now a rational answer to this false alternative?

I will continue this in another post.

No comments: