Djinn was played as a destroy effect for years, it's a terrible card in modern magic either way but would be an interesting player in 93/94 if you could combo with Consecrate Land.
One quick note- even if Serendib Djinn's wording were changed to something like "At the beginning of your upkeep, destroy a land you control...", then it would still not combo with Consecrate Land. Or rather, it would, but probably not in the way that you are thinking.
I gather what you wish to do is choose your Consecrated land each turn and expect this to satisfy the trigger, meanwhile going about the rest of your game with other lands on the battlefield. Right? This would not work under the current rules.
This is because Consecrate Land gives the enchanted land Indestructible, and so it would therefore be an illegal choice when resolving this ability.
What you could do, though, is destroy all of your other lands leaving only Consecrate-enchanted lands on the battlefield under you control. This would at least allow you to escape the other "When you control no lands..." trigger condition. But, again, I don't think this is what you were going for.
There are various ways to change the wording of the ability to something that would combo with Consecrate Land, but I feel any such wording would be even further away from the original text than the current Oracle seems to be.
FYI, the hypothetical wording above would still combo with Pyramids, though.
Oh yeah I forgot that the rules are 'now' (vs. 1994) smart enough to know the attributes of an object. For old people like me this is counter intuitive. A rule that I have to constantly remind myself of is that damage 'knows' it has qualities. Deathtouch being the most common example when assigning it, the game rules 'know' 1 point is lethal. This is similar the game rules know the object can't be destroyed.
So really this is another reason to make it work as Garfield intended. It will work as an awful combo with Pyramids. It allows you to have 1 land (Consecrated) after an Armageddon. It's still reallllll bad though.
Thanks for clarifying.