9. Paul Kingsnorth & Martin Shaw: A poet and mythologist convert

[@kbeetles]

I could listen to these people for hours and feel I arrived home in their company.

[@olgakarpushina492]

How come there are no comments? That's scandalous!

[@Frederer59]

Don't conflate pollution with climate. We can't control climate any more than we can change the sun, the procession or axis of our planet, or any other. 16:22

[@GoatSong-l6x]

Too many people believe in the cult of climate.

[@stefanlouw6395]

Yes it is!

[@markpaladiy5748]

1. The general, 'masculine' cosmos and the special, 'feminine' Earth (Gen 1:1); 2. The Earth, as its own general subject, and its special kind of material wealth: its abiding maximal abundance of open liquid water (v. 2); 3. That water, in general, and its cycling (the water cycle, vs. 3-10); 4. The water cycle, in general, and its beneficiaries: biological life (vs. 11-12); 5. Biological life, in general, and its special category, animal biology (vs. 20-25); 6. Animals, in general, and its special category, humans (vs. 26-29); 7. The general human and the special...woman (Genesis 2:7-25). This seven-fold marriage-typological recursion is itself 'married' to the fact that Genesis 1 reports of exactly five instances of God naming as many things: (i) of continual regular rotation of the Earth, which moderates the 'directional' radiation for all parts of the Earth (Gen 1:4-5); (ii) the Earth's atmosphere, which further moderates that radiation to the surface (Gen 1:6-8); (iii) the continual thermal exchange of land and sea, and of the air above each, all of which constitutes the thermal moderating system of Earth (apart from it's rotation) (Gen 1: 9-10). The point is, the profound things are 'hidden' inside the 'mundane', and, some things that may seem mundane, isolated facts may be part of a profound system. Nature itself is congruent with itself. And, God designed Nature to affirm not only life forms in general, but humans in particular, and even the woman especially. For, while traveling to the garden, the most natural topic of conversation would have been the self-evident life-affirming Design in Nature, such as the particular primary 'part' of that Design that revolves around marriage. It surely was not a bunch of random 'whatever' to which a bunch of TV-addled children would have had recourse: having been trapped inside four essentially blank walls for essentially their fifth-through-twelfth years of life. For, if we had come upon a text that says nothing but, 'A man and his little boy walk to a play park by way of a wild bird sanctuary', we normally assume this some text implies that an unassuming back-and-forth conversation transpired, and that this conversation largely was about both the birds, as such, and about the sanctuary.