One or a million

 

Well...on the positive side we're pretty dog-gone efficient! 
That was my original comment to this post on face book. (Since I'm doing this on my phone you'll have to scroll to the bottom of the page to see what is being tasked about here. Sorry, I'd fix it if I could.)
But then a deeper conversation happened, and so I thought I would share this response with you.
Here's what I'm responding to:
I'm sure I've done this too many times myself, but often these little pithy posts ignore too much and people go "yeah that makes sense" without thinking it through. If you use a car, if you use paper, if you live in a house, well, then you are participating in the society that takes from the earth.
A lot of popular thinking derives from the romantic idea that people should live "simply" and in tune with the environment, as the noble savages do. The problem with that is the savages are not noble, they are savage. Have you been any place where people live on subsistence? I have. Now, they may want to live that way, and they may be maintaining their culture and heritage, but subsistence is not capable of sustaining the population of human beings.
The classic Christian view, much slandered by today's worshippers of Gaia (I.e. pagans), is that God put human beings on the earth to subdue it and to be fruitful and multiply. The apostle Paul told us He (God) has given us all things to enjoy. I think the earth is a wonderful place, full of richness which God placed there in creation, unlike any other planet (the number now known is over 1000 and increasing practically daily). At the same time we are not owners, we are managers, who care for Earth (or ought) as a trust from God.
....................................
Now don't misunderstand me, there are some great points in here.
My objective here isn't to disagree but simply to lend perspective.
So here it is....
....................................
Certainly any life form requires resources to exist, however unintentionally though, most of them also give back, while taking only those resources they require to live.
Perhaps if our usage (as humans) of resources was more proportionally in line with a mere need rather than that of comfort and convenience, we might not need to be so concerned about the availability or replenishing of them.
However this isn't at all the case.
Americans as a minority of the world's populous use a majority of the world's resources.
While I agree with Paul about man's enjoyment of the Earth, certainly the enjoyment he mentions  can not be equated with the sort of gluttony we have forced the Earth to provide for us in the name of consumerism and progress.
As I have always said, enough is enough, but too much is never enough. All sin has an every increasing appetite that will not be satisfied until it has realized its full potential for destruction.
As far as man subduing the Earth (Genesis), Subdue, as I'm sure you must know was never intended (as many wrongfully interpret) to be equated with conquering. So that the Earth is to serve man.
In fact until its translation into English I'm not sure it was ever read that way. The original intention was rather to emphasize man's obligation to maintain and care for the Earth just as with the garden.
The Earth is just as much God's creation as man is however I've never read that the Earth is responsible for taking care of us, only that we are to care for it.
That we personally, individually do no harm may be fine and dandy, but it isn't nearly the sort of hand washing it once was in days gone by when we provided for ourselves. Since we now live in a culture where everything is done for us (and we do for everyone else).
The greatest impact then, that we can make is through intentionally directing where our money goes as spending it with one company or another, at one store or another, in one way or another is tantamount to a vote in favor of whatever practices are being used to provide them.
Whether that impacts either a resource or a culture, we should consider what message we are sending with our consumer habits as a very real part of the value of our purchase. Because undeniably we are sending a message and there is no profit where there is no market.
There is on the horizon, (so it would seem) an approaching point of no return for certain ecological things to be corrected if they can at all even be corrected.
So if, as I believe, our first ministry is to our families (specifically here children since they will bare the brunt of our actions) and our fellow man, then the manner in which we have utilized and maintained these resources thus far indicates we are sorely failing in this area.
College, careers, and creature comforts will have little to no meaning to our children if there is no source of non toxic air and food.
If it is a result of a natural occurrence then so be it, but let it not be so simply because our generation was wasteful and greedy, or failed to make right what they could while they could.
That's not very Christ like at all.
Not the Christ I know at least.
Solo Cristo Salva