On page 270 of Gaia and God, Rosemary Ruether states:
"We need to take time to sit under trees, look at water, and at the sky, observe small biotic communities of plants and animals with close attention, get back in touch with the living earth. We can start to release the stifled intuitive and creative powers of our organism, to draw and to write poetry, and to know that we stand on holy ground."
On page 299, in an endnote about the biblical personification of nature, Ruether says:
"These attributions of personlike qualities to nature are often dismissed as either meaningless 'poetry' or as survivals of Baalism in Hebrew scripture. Either way, they can be ignored as a serious part of the theology of the biblical God. Although they may be survivals of Baalism, I see that neither as bad nor as incompatible with Yahwism. Clearly the Old Testament authors who used such language did not either. It is important to understand that 'animism' does not mean deification of nature, but simply the recognition of personlike life in nature."
I've often had a hard time being inspired by nature. When I was a child, every Sabbath, my Dad showed us kids two things on TV: an episode of Superbook, which was an animated Bible story, and New Wilderness, a show about animals that was hosted by the late Lorne Greene. (And, come to think of it, I watched Lorne Greene on this before I even knew about Bonanza!) Then, we'd draw a picture of our favorite scene. I mostly drew something from the Superbook episode because I found nature shows to be boring. When I complained one time about my Dad having a nature show on, my Dad told me to write a paper on Romans 1:20, which says that God's attributes are evident in what God has made. My Dad's basis for showing us a Bible show and a nature show on the Sabbath was probably what Christianity calls the two books of God: God's book of Scripture, and God's book of nature. By looking at both, we can see what God is like.
In my recollection, there was one time when nature inspired me. I was at Indiana Wesleyan University for a conference on the Gospel, and I was awash in religious sentiment, after having heard some awesome messages, and having sung some fantastic praise songs. I went to a TV room early one morning, flipped on the TV, and noticed that New Wilderness was on. I watched it, and, this time, I liked it.
Why has nature bored me? A while back in biblical scholarship, there was a notion that ancient Near Eastern religions were nature-based and animistic, whereas the religion of the Hebrew Bible was different because it had a God who acted in history. Nowadays, as far as I know, that view has pretty much been discarded, for ancient Near Eastern religions have gods who act in history, and there are times when the Yahwistic religions in the Hebrew Bible talk about the natural cycle. Does nature have a personality? Does not the Hebrew Bible talk about nature doing personal things? I think that there are still many scholars who read such passages as poetic personification, meaning that they don't take them literally. But Rosemary Ruether asks why we shouldn't take them literally. Maybe we'd treat nature better if we regarded it as sentient!
But, if I had to choose between nature and history (or, for biblical minimalists, stories about humans), I'd choose the latter, for I find humans to be more interesting. I move around in a world of ideas. Looking at a waterfall or a mountain doesn't do much for me! I do like animals as pets, but I get bored by shows about animals.
Also, I wonder: Is there a sense deep down within me that learning more about nature will lead me away from God? There are ideas among scientists that appear to contradict a literal interpretation of the Bible. But, also, I am more awed by nature when I view it as beautiful for its own sake---and as something that came about through a process of development rather than instantaneously at creation. And so, somewhere in my mind, an appreciation of nature contradicts my worship of God. One reason that I have a hard time incorporating nature into my spirituality is that efforts to reconcile the Bible with science appear rather contrived and artificial to me, and so they don't exactly inspire me. Also, attempts to draw theological conclusions from nature seem contrived and artificial as well.
I'd like to appreciate nature, though. And perhaps Ruether's presentation of nature as a balanced organism can lead me to appreciate it as a work of art, and as something that sustains humans and other creatures. Interestingly, my family when I was growing up presented nature as such.