Controversy Surrounds Newly Published Green Bible
A few months back, we told you that HarperOne had published the first "eco-Bible," which is printed with soy ink and highlights the parts of the Book that pertain to the environment. We also mentioned that there was a little bit of controversy coming from some Christian groups because loving the environment "borders on pantheism." But, there are some other issues people have with the book as well.
Fox News invited the publisher of the green Bible onto their station recently to discuss the Book, as well as some of the controversial issues surrounding it. I'd say it's worth a look, even if the HarperOne guy isn't so sure how to act on television.
If you aren't swayed by the criticisms of the green Bible, you can takepart and pick up your own copy, if that's something you'd like to have.
- Categories: Environment,Business & Trade

First off I do have a few issues with the materials used for this bible. I’m going to start with cotton. Cotton is not environmentally friendly in any way. It requires high levels of fertilizers and pesticides to be grown and releases them into the environment polluting soil and water supplies. A much better alternative would be hemp, which not only requires no chemicals to be grown, but it grows faster requiring less land to be cultivated. It looks to me like they treated and produced the cotton in such a way as well as to make it appear more like hemp, which seems a bit counter intuitive to me. The other issue I have is with the use of soy for the ink. I have two problems with this. First off soy is extremely harmful to the body and has been shown to contribute significantly to cancer (think twice before using it every day for your breakfast cereal,) so we shouldn’t even be producing it. The other problem I have with the soy ink is that when you use food products to produce things that are not eaten by people you create two problems. First you are going to increase the demand for the product and reduce its availability for feeding human beings. Subsequently, you are going to increase the cost of that food product, which is not good for people who might place eating food and feeding the millions of starving people in the world above reading a book that has ink that is from a “natural source.” How much pesticides and fertilizer was released on the planet for the production of this book at the expense of economical healthy food for human beings?
The only thing that this bible is good for is making money for a corporation who will do anything to sell a product because it has legal liability to do so under the contract that it holds with its share holders. We need to be educated consumers/non-consumers instead of depending on the external organizations, companies, corporations, and government bodies to be “green.” Instead take responsibility for your life and educate yourself about what you are buying. If you are too lazy to grow your own food, and own chickens than you are too lazy to take responsibility for the environment. Stop looking outward and start looking INWARD for the solutions. 2
I found this through a Google search after seeing the FOX News story. I wanted to find out who these critics were and what they were really saying. After all, FOX only asked a rep of the publisher to tell us what critics were saying, and that's pretty pathetic reporting on FOX's part. No one can seriously expect the rep to accurately convey serious criticism of his book. Based on this website, I did a search for "green Bible" and "borders on pantheism" (you put it in quotes as if someone actually said it) but the only site that came up was this one. So, who is making this criticism? At this point, I can only conclude the promoters of this book are trying to create criticism believing that will drum up lackluster sales. Even this site is trying to sell the book.
First off I do have a few issues with the materials used for this bible. I’m going to start with cotton. Cotton is not environmentally friendly in any way. It requires high levels of fertilizers and pesticides to be grown and releases them into the environment polluting soil and water supplies. A much better alternative would be hemp, which not only requires no chemicals to be grown, but it grows faster requiring less land to be cultivated. It looks to me like they treated and produced the cotton in such a way as well as to make it appear more like hemp, which seems a bit counter intuitive to me. The other issue I have is with the use of soy for the ink. I have two problems with this. First off soy is extremely harmful to the body and has been shown to contribute significantly to cancer (think twice before using it every day for your breakfast cereal,) so we shouldn’t even be producing it. The other problem I have with the soy ink is that when you use food products to produce things that are not eaten by people you create two problems. First you are going to increase the demand for the product and reduce its availability for feeding human beings. Subsequently, you are going to increase the cost of that food product, which is not good for people who might place eating food and feeding the millions of starving people in the world above reading a book that has ink that is from a “natural source.” How much pesticides and fertilizer was released on the planet for the production of this book at the expense of economical healthy food for human beings?
The only thing that this bible is good for is making money for a corporation who will do anything to sell a product because it has legal liability to do so under the contract that it holds with its share holders. We need to be educated consumers/non-consumers instead of depending on the external organizations, companies, corporations, and government bodies to be “green.” Instead take responsibility for your life and educate yourself about what you are buying. If you are too lazy to grow your own food, and own chickens than you are too lazy to take responsibility for the environment. Stop looking outward and start looking INWARD for the solutions.